I learn a lot from road trips with my parents. This is a new one from my Dad. The famous 'Bystander Effect' from the Kitty Genovese murder in 1964 is actually kind of not true. Actually, the first time I heard about Kitty Genovese was from Boondock Saints, the movie. The story goes like this: Kitty Genovese, a 28 year old, was stabbed to death in Queens in 1964, supposedly while 38 people looked on and no one called the police. This case has been in Psychology and Sociology textbooks as the 'Bystander Effect,' and everyone wondered why no one would call the police when they just witnessed a murder. Thanks to my Dad and Wikipedia, here's the full story:
While Genovese's neighbors were vilified by the article, "Thirty-Eight onlookers who did nothing" is a misleading conception. The article begins:
"For more than half an hour thirty-eight respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens."
The lead is dramatic but factually inaccurate. None of the witnesses observed the attacks in their entirety. Because of the layout of the complex and the fact that the attacks took place in different locations, no witness saw the entire sequence. Most only heard portions of the incident without realizing its seriousness, a few saw only small portions of the initial assault, and no witnesses directly saw the final attack and attempted rape in an exterior hallway which resulted in Genovese's death.[1]
Nevertheless, media attention to the Genovese murder led to reform of the NYPD's telephone reporting system; the system in place at the time of the assault was often inefficient and directed individuals to the incorrect department. The melodramatic press coverage also led to serious investigation of the bystander effect by academic psychologists. In addition, some communities organized Neighborhood Watch programs and the equivalent for apartment buildings to aid people in distress.
In September 2007, the American Psychologist published an examination of the factual basis of coverage of the Kitty Genovese murder in psychology textbooks. The three authors concluded the story is parable more than fact, largely owing to inaccurate newspaper coverage at the time of the incident.[12] "The since-challenged story of the circumstances surrounding Genovese's death 'continues to inhabit introductory social psychology textbooks (and thus the minds of future social psychologists),' the trio of British university professors write in the September issue of American Psychologist. The result is a lack of research into similar cases, their article maintains".[13]
In other news, some stuff that came up in class that I had to look up:
"In addition to the shift away from individualism the embrace of outreach, atleast in the current context, reflects a move away from the discourse of racetowards the discourse of class. While the Outreach Task Report begins with a ringing affirmation of the value of diversify, it is social class which quickly emerges as the dominant analytic trope. Thus the most significant recommendation of the Task Force Report was that the university pursue an aggressive intervention policy according to which each of the campuses would select a set of K-12 'partner schools' within their catchment area and make a commitment to allocating significant resources to enhance the likelihood that graduates of these schools would be able to successfully compete for admission to the University of California. ... In effect, the Task Force's recommendation was that the UC focus its efforts on helping raise the competitiveness of students stranded on the bottom rungs of the California public education system. In this respect, the logic of outreach draws upon the rhetorical power of an increasingly visible social critique of what Kozol (1991) has called the 'savage inequalities' of the American public educational system."
