Killing The Messenger Is In Vogue Again

Since, racist, bigoted, patriarchal, trans/homophobic, sexist, male chauvinist, cis-biased, privileged, colonizer has worked so well over the decades to stifle speech, silence the dissenters, and retain the narrative when challenged, let us add to that the charge of ‘mis-informer’, or one who is accused of trafficking in ‘misinformation’.

You see, to be labeled as one who traffics in misinformation works much like the other labels (or libels). It is a charge intended to be played out in the public arena. And it’s purpose is to simply discredit the one to whom the charge of misinformation is being assigned. Typically, this is done when the supposed offender is engaging in what we used to call telling the truth. It is the danger of the truth being known that the public (who serve as the jury) cannot know. If the truth be known by the jury, well then the narrative will be destroyed, and the jury box just might operate in that truth and exonerate the one who now wears the label. And so, what we need to do is we need to  ‘prime’ the jury box with label words, words that if they are applied, will invoke an immediate and complete rejection, not only of what the mis-informer supposedly said, but of anything else he or she would have to say from here on out. That is the goal, the real purpose, of labeling someone with the crime of ‘misinformation’ in the public setting.

Engaging in such public discrediting turns the old axiom of not killing the messenger on it’s head. You see, the messenger carries only the message. He didn’t write it, seal it, or call for it’s dissemination. He merely does the bidding of the one who did. And yet, in our modern era, it is the messenger who is most feared, most despised, and most targeted. It is the messenger who is also the one most misquoted, most taken out of context, and most distorted. He is a danger. And before he even comes and challenges the narrative of our own created truth with the truth itself, we must find a way of discrediting him, of taking away his proclamation, and letting him in the town square alone, ashamed, and completely without voice. And so we condition his intended audience to discredit him in what we label him. We charge him as one who engages in the currency of misinformation.

It is the court of public opinion, that unfortunately then at times gives license to bleed over into other courts of jurisdiction, that gives the poor messenger none of the afforded rights that the accused should have. For the one labeled as engaging in misinformation, where is his opportunity to face his accuser? His accuser’s teeth are in his back and yet he’s never given a chance to face his accuser because….he is discredited. Where is his right to see exactly what he’s misinformed on? Rarely is the discussion on exactly what he says but instead it focuses on who he is, or rather, what now others say who he is. Where is his representation; even in the representation of himself? Does he get the same venues, the same gatherings, the same media outlets? And where is his right to a fair trial among those whose discernment has already been poisoned with the pre-conceived notions of the ones who hated the messenger even before he arrived?

As it was of old, clearly illustrated in the Old Testament of the messengers sent to Israel, and as it was in the time of the New Testament illustrated in the life of the apostles and Christ Himself, as it was during the time of the reformation, and as it still now today is, …… is the messenger that is most feared, most hated, and most despised by a world already misinformed even before the messenger’s arrival.

%d bloggers like this: