Was the story wrong?
The real-life retelling inspired by actual events loosely based on the alleged true story previously dramatized...
So…what is true?
Back in 1964, Kitty Genovese was stabbed in New York in the middle of the night. What I remember from my college psychology class was that the New York Times newspaper story reported that none of her 38 neighbors called the police and no one went outside to help her. The story was a symbol for the anonymous life in big cities and was used as proof for what is known as “the bystander effect”, and later (more positively) the impetus for the 911 system and the Good Samaritan laws.
So what if the story was wrong? In internationally-bestselling author Rutger Bregman’s new book Humankind, there’s a different version: Her friend Sophia rushed out to help and Kitty died in her arms. There were not 38 eyewitnesses. It was a cold night and at 3 am windows were closed. Of the people who did wake up, two called the police.
Bregman’s verision of Kitty Genovese’s story is not a story about indifference, but the true story of a caring neighbor and authorities showing up late. And the New York Times admitted some years later that their reporting was flawed and that the original story had grossly exaggerated the situation.
The argument made in Humankind is that it is realistic to assume that people are good. And that the instinct to cooperate rather than compete, trust rather than distrust, goes back to the beginning of human history.
And since what we choose to believe affects our actions, I choose to err on the side of the inherent goodness of folks.
Maybe questioning what we’ve been told is a healthy and wise decison! Maybe hesitating before we assume, before we judge, before we hurt someone, before we speak would help lessen the power of “fake news.”
What do you think?