The sociologist: the live-streamed execution is the failure of Trump’s America
Sociologist Marco Lombardi: the live broadcasting of an execution is a ‘declaration of the United States’ internal ethical, moral and political failure’
Key points
The decision to livestream a public execution – that of Nidal Hasan, the man responsible for the 2009 massacre at Fort Hood military base – inevitably causes consternation. A man is to be executed by a firing squad whilst an online audience – potentially unlimited in size – will watch the scene unfold on a screen, from the comfort of their own living rooms, on public transport, at work or wherever they choose.
The Pentagon’s aim is to stage a demonstration: Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth explained that people need to be able to see this, so that they ‘understand that there are serious consequences for this sort of action’.
There has not been a public execution in the United States for ninety years. The image of public executions usually brings to mind countries under dictatorial regimes. It is difficult to associate this with a nation whose Constitution is founded on the guarantee of fundamental freedoms. It should be made clear that the discussion does not centre on the death penalty – which is provided for under the US judicial system – but rather focuses on the need to make executions a public event.
The United States of America, a country that ‘threatens its own citizens’
What does this decision tell us about the current state of the United States? Marco Lombardi – professor of sociology at the Catholic University of Milan and founder of the research centre ‘Italian Team for Security, Terroristic Issues & Managing Emergencies’ – explains that the news confronts us with a reality where there is ‘no difference between the parties to today’s various conflicts: what is the difference between the live streaming from the United States and the public executions we see in Iran and Afghanistan?’. It is important to emphasise that ‘public execution is not a necessity of justice’; on the contrary, it amounts to a way of ‘translating justice into terms of threat’ – as stated by Pete Hegseth himself. ‘It is an unequivocally terrorist context, in which the threat is directed at one’s own citizens – not even against the enemy – to compel them to abide by their country’s laws.’
The voyeurism of violence
In any media event, it is the audience that determines the success or failure of the programme. ‘I expect there to be millions of people’ tuning in to watch the live broadcast of the execution – comments Lombardi – who ‘will gradually peek more and more through the fingers held up to their eyes for fear of seeing, just as children do’. Whilst violence has always held a fascination for people’s morbid curiosity, with the advent of the media any inhibitory restraint has been lost, including the ‘self-control’ provided by common sense. ‘We are living in the age of “trash” and the media are following this trend, constantly replaying violence through the media.’ According to the sociologist, those who do not watch the live broadcast will probably do so out of a choice that is ‘more political than anything else’.
