Media, Dummy Variables, Fame, Fathers of Sociology, and School Shootings

21 April 2007 at 4:54 pm Leave a comment

| Chihmao Hsieh |

By now, all readers of this blog are probably well-aware of the massacre at Virginia Tech that took 33 lives. (My own prayers go out to all those affected by the tragedy.)

Some controversies are bound to be re-visited during and after the investigation (e.g. gun control) but others are starting to reveal themselves as mainstream for the first time. Namely, the media itself may be promoting these types of shootings. As one expert interviewed on CNN explained, American media in particular can’t resist the temptation of reporting with superlatives. At one point the massacre was described as the ‘bloodiest’ US school shooting in history. Then some newsreporter inevitably checked the history books to immediately reveal that it was the ‘bloodiest’ shooting in US history, period. And then such reference to records are splashed across headlines. Why? The last thing I want to know if a shooter was stalking through the halls at my university is that his performance measure is based on his subsequent fame judged not only by a body count, but also by a set of outlier-oriented dummy variables.

Perhaps the general term ‘fame’ is less appropriate in the previous paragraph, than the strictly negative term ‘infamy.’ Yet fame is precisely more relevant today, especially in the USA. With today’s communication technologies and the popularization of youtube, myspace, and other media channels (note: my goodness, have you seen the coverage on this?), people are identifying fame as one of the quickest ways up the social strata. Did Marx, Durkheim, or Weber ever imagine that the value of their conceptual distinctions among power, prestige, and wealth could be discounted by a world where fame alone is enough? How about by a world where one can ‘be famous for just being famous’? Likely not, on both counts.

Entry filed under: Former Guest Bloggers, Institutions, Management Theory.

Athey on Organizational Complementarities Theoretical vs. Teórico vs. 理论: How the Precision of Foreign Language Relates to the Cost of Innovation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Nicolai J. Foss | home | posts
Peter G. Klein | home | posts
Richard Langlois | home | posts
Lasse B. Lien | home | posts


Former Guests | posts


Recent Posts



Our Recent Books

Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment: A New Approach to the Firm (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
Peter G. Klein and Micheal E. Sykuta, eds., The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Peter G. Klein, The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets (Mises Institute, 2010).
Richard N. Langlois, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy (Routledge, 2007).
Nicolai J. Foss, Strategy, Economic Organization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Coordination of Firms and Resources (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Raghu Garud, Arun Kumaraswamy, and Richard N. Langlois, eds., Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures, Networks and Organizations (Blackwell, 2003).
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, eds., Entrepreneurship and the Firm: Austrian Perspectives on Economic Organization (Elgar, 2002).
Nicolai J. Foss and Volker Mahnke, eds., Competence, Governance, and Entrepreneurship: Advances in Economic Strategy Research (Oxford, 2000).
Nicolai J. Foss and Paul L. Robertson, eds., Resources, Technology, and Strategy: Explorations in the Resource-based Perspective (Routledge, 2000).

%d bloggers like this: