Newsrooms in the U.S. set the rumor mill in motion Wednesday with headlines pointing to the Muslim religion of three Arab-Americans shot and killed over a reported parking dispute in Chapel Hill, N.C.
Reports noting the religion of the victims — something rarely noted in domestic shooting stories — were the rule. Left out of many headlines was the shooter's professed atheism.
“Three members of a Muslim family were killed execution style by their own neighbor,” New York Daily News reported.
“3 Members Of Muslim Family Shot Dead In Chapel Hill,” Huffington Post Impact reported.
For Yahoo: “Three Muslim-American students killed near North Carolina university campus.”
“Parking Dispute Cited in Shooting Deaths of 3 Muslims in North Carolina,” the Wall Street Journal reported.
“Chapel Hill Shooting Leaves 3 Muslim Students Dead; Neighbor Is Charged,” the New York Times reported.
Craig Stephen Hicks, a self-professed atheist, reportedly shot and killed three Arab-Americans, Deah Shaddy Bakarat, 23; his wife, Yusor Mohammad, 21; and her sister Razan Mohammad Abu-Salah, 19, Tuesday evening at around 5:00 pm.
Following news that Hicks, who is being charged with three counts of first-degree murder, had shot and killed the three people of the Muslim faith, social media jumped to life, the hashtag #MuslimLivesMatter trending nationwide on Twitter.
“#MuslimLivesMatter started in response to tragic #ChapelHillShooting that claimed lives of 3 young American Muslims,” Al Jazeera America's Wajahat Ali said.
But then something else happened Wednesday morning: As details regarding the murders slowly came to light, a supporting narrative did as well.
Media pundits and social media users began to suggest that the three Arab-Americans were targeted and murdered by Hicks due to their faith.
“It is hard to argue with the point being made that if a Muslim had shot three non Muslims it would be all over the news," the BBC’s Nihal Arthanayake said on Twitter.
“I see your heartbreak Muslim followers, yes #chapelhillshooting was terrorism #Islamophobia those young ones were Shahid, died for faith,” tweeted Lousie Mensch, who writes for British daily The Times.
“Some reports that #ChapelHillShooting assailant was a liberal. Indeed/either way — #Islamaphobia is NOT limited to the right wing,” CNN contributor Sally Kohn said on Twitter after suggesting earlier that the story was not being covered enough by the press.
Advocacy groups also weighed in Wednesday, imploring Chapel Hill police to investigate Hick's motives for allegedly murdering the three Arab-Americans.
“Based on the brutal nature of this crime, the past anti-religion statements of the alleged perpetrator, the religious attire of two of the victims, and the rising anti-Muslim rhetoric in American society, we urge state and federal law enforcement authorities to quickly address speculation of a possible bias motive in this case,” Council on American Islamic Relations executive director Nihad Awad said in a statement.
In a separate statement, a spokesperson for the American Islamic Forum for Democracy said: "Some have speculated that these murders were connected to vengeance - that is, revenge for the horrors committed under the banner of Islamism. Again, while we do not yet know what motivated Hicks, we must continue to work to combat the kind of hatred and hostility that pits good people of all faiths and none against one another."
But even if Hicks hated people of both Christian and Muslim faiths, as his personal Facebook page certainly suggests, there appears to be scant evidence that the Chapel Hill slayings had anything to do with religion. According to Hicks' wife and Chapel Hill law enforcement officials, the shootings were prompted by a traffic dispute.
“Our preliminary investigation indicates that the crime was motivated by an ongoing neighbor dispute over parking,” the Chapel Hill Police department said Wednesday morning. “Hicks is cooperating with investigators and more information may be released at a later time.”
Chief Chris Blue of the Chapel Hill Police Department added: “Our investigators are exploring what could have motivated Mr. Hicks to commit such a senseless and tragic act. We understand the concerns about the possibility that this was hate-motivated and we will exhaust every lead to determine if that is the case. Our thoughts are with the families and friends of these young people who lost their lives so needlessly.”
Further, an attorney representing Hicks' wife, Karen, said the shootings were not over religion but a “ mundane” parking issue, adding that she had long been aware of his “ frustration” with their neighbors.
Once the information about the parking dispute was reported, some of the newsrooms that initially headlined the Muslim angle shifted to accusing the media of not paying more attention to the shootings.
“The media ignored the #ChapelHillShooting because the victims were Muslim,” the Independent claimed Wednesday afternoon.
Elsewhere, a widely circulated political cartoon by Carlos Latuff suggested the U.S. media is disinterested in the story because it involves dead Muslims.
#ChapelHillShooting #MuslimLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/cWGtU6HF1B
— Joe Catron (@jncatron) February 11, 2015
Similarly, the so-called “explainer” news site Vox suggested that the Chapel Hill homicides aren’t bigger news because the victims are Muslims.
“Had the killer been a Muslim who killed three non-Muslim with an apparent religious motivation, it would have been instantly labeled as terrorism — and there would surely be a beltway political controversy if President Obama failed to denounce it as such within hours,” Vox claimed. “But because the religious identities were reversed in this case, it did not ‘count’ as terrorism, and the press has shown very little interest in compelling a response from the White House.”
Rushes to mistaken judgments about shooters and their victims aren't new.
When former University of Alabama at Huntsville Professor Dr. Amy Bishop shot 12 of her colleagues, killing three and wounding three more, in February 2010, Reuters Foundation Fellow Jonathan Curiel asked: “Does racism explain the tenure shooting and the Tea Party movement?”
This turned out to be far off the mark.
Later, in 2011, media rushed to proclaim Jared Loughner’s shooting spree in Casas Adobes, Ariz., which claimed the lives of six people and injured 13 more, the product of “right-wing” rhetoric, a suggestion that came before the bullet casings were even cold.
“Arizona massacre: Should Sarah Palin share the blame?” read one headline.
Palin and conservative entrepreneur Glenn Beck both “are finally being held to account for recklessly playing with violent images in a way that is bound to incite the unstable,” the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank said at the time.
“You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers,” the New York Times’ Paul Krugman wrote, adding “We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was.”
In 2012, after James Holmes shot up a theater in Aurora, Colo., ABC’s Brian Ross — with no proof or confirmation — suggested the shooter was a member of the Tea Party.
“There is a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colo., uh Paige, on the Colorado Tea Party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last summer. We don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes, but it is Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado,” Ross said.
These suggestions turned out to be false, as the shooters in each case appeared to have acted alone.
