Lessons from the Oklahoma City bombing, three decades later

Thirty years have passed since a fateful date in the United States, when 2,300 kilos of explosives killed 168 people when they detonated outside a federal building in the Oklahoma state capital. From a news perspective, it became clear how in times of great tragedy, haste is fertile ground for the circulation of often malicious rumors. Networks such as CBS, ABC, and CNN conveyed the idea that authorities were searching for a suspect from the Middle East. Even when the police circulated composite sketches of the suspect, with Caucasian features, a newspaper such asThe Daily OklahomanHe insisted that the perpetrator was still considered a citizen of one of the countries hostile to the United States in the region. They suggested a far-right conspiracy. Neither: the killer acted with the help of two people, but it was essentially a lone-wolf act.

No one considered the sources who fueled—at the consequent cost of Islamophobia—the Middle East theory, reportedly originating from the FBI. Was it honest or did it have a political agenda? And, above all, has anything changed in the last thirty years to prevent these dysfunctions? I would say no, on the contrary, since news times have accelerated. Major events generate massive coverage, and this means many minutes of airtime and many articles vying for clicks. But if we don't realize the vulnerability this entails, it's easy to end up losing the treasure of credibility to a self-serving—and malicious—source.