Introduction

No one may ever truly know what transpired on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., after a double-booked day of passionate rallies ended in a now-viral confrontation between a young white student, singled out from the crowd of his classmates, and a Native American elder. In researching for this report, three main videos were used. They were Duncan (2019). b.Duncan (2019), and Noland (2019).

In the longest of the videos, Duncan (2019), a group of about 5 members of the radical Black Hebrew Israelites can be seen taunting and shouting racial slurs at a group of mostly white male Covington Catholic students, visiting the Capitol from their high school in Kentucky for the anti-abortion March For Life. It is not until about an hour and a half into this video that Nathan Phillips, the Native American elder, in D.C. for the Indigenous Peoples’ March, entered the scene (Duncan, 2019). Here, b.Duncan (2019) and Noland (2019) begin to film the situation and capture Nathan Phillips’ insertion into the heart of the crowd. Noland’s (2019) video was highly circulated throughout Twitter and Facebook, however, the ‘social media influencer’ who amplified the video has been subject to Congressional inquiry (CBS News, 2019, para. 8).

This scene, especially considering the opinion-sharing nature of social media, particularly Twitter, transformed Nick Sandmann’s life and had an irreversible effect on the discourse leading to partisan tribalism within the United States.

This report is a Burkean dramatistic critical analysis of how one incident can divide the nation into supporters and dissenters, and, with recent developments, how a narrative throughout media can change over time, in which, upon the entire ordeal’s undisputed conclusion, power in society has shifted, or if it has at all. To reveal the relationships of power in this scene, per McKerrow (1989), as it is vital to examine the “whole picture” (p. 97), this report considers Burke’s concepts of guilt and mortification of the agent, Nick Sandmann, and scapegoating onto the villain, Nathan Phillips, á la Tonn, et al. (1993). It will also analyze the rhetoric which frames the agreed-upon story - or at least accepted throughout the mainstream media, and thus, the public - and the symbolism thrust upon the characters of this unfortunate incident throughout traditional media and on various social media websites (Ott & Aoki, 2002).

Critical Analysis

Guilt/Mortification

On February 13th, the Diocese of Covington released the commissioned report of the independent investigation of the incident, fully exonerating Nick Sandmann, the junior from Covington Catholic High School, and his classmates, from any wrongdoing (Moran, 2019, p. 2). After virulent anger ensued on both sides, how did we get here, and what do the investigation’s results say about society’s current power dynamics?

Noland’s (2019) video was posted immediately, and within a day, Twitter had exploded. It seemed as if everyone had an opinion on the three-minute clip of the confrontation, and it had near-instantly become viral. Half the country saw a grown man violating a minor’s personal space, while the other saw a white male, adorned in a red ‘Make America Great Again’ ballcap (insert imagery of far-right politics), taunting and disrespecting a Native American elder. There were intense implications and extreme interpretations of this – despite it being captured on multiple videos – vague incident. Within a day, the Bishop of Covington, Archbishop of Louisville, Mayor of Covington, and U.S. Representative Deb Haaland (D-NM), the first Native American Congresswoman, all tweeted condemnation of the CovCath students’ behavior (Boorstein, 2019, paras. 16-21; Brookbank & Londberg, paras. 18-19; 29). Surprisingly, it was Fox News’ Tucker Carlson who correctly identified this strategy, á la Tonn, et al. (1993), when he called the condemnation “bipartisan”: Republicans wanted “to inoculate themselves from charges of improper thought” (Carlson, 2019).

Nathan Phillips and Nick Sandmann had to make their own statements. The latter released a statement through CNN and was interviewed on NBC’s The Today Show. Sandmann, or at least the conjunct of his law and P.R. firms, utilized Burke’s concept of mortification of the agent, strategically admitting guilt. According to Tonn, et al. (1993), confession is a “recognition of the choice to act” and shows that the agent, Nick Sandmann, is “moral, rational,” and “dominates and coordinates scene and act” (p. 228).

In his statements, Sandmann recognized his actions, but insisted that they were the ones being provoked: “Better [to act/chant] than let [the Black Israelites] slander us.” He shows remorse – “in hindsight I wish we had found another spot” – and says that he was respectful of Mr. Phillips (The Today Show, 2019). But, as per Tonn, et al. (1993), the admission of guilt and condemnation by usual supporters are positive strategic acts and occurrences, in which the guilt is transferred to another (this will be addressed in the subsequent sections).

Additionally, this is an opportunity to create a relationship between the scene, the agent, and the act (immortalized as a smirk); a relationship in which the agent can dominate (p. 228). However, from this, Sandmann breaks: “I can’t say that I’m sorry,” because he was trying to “diffuse [sic] the situation,” and, he insists, the students would not have acted “without permission” from their chaperones, even though Phillips and the Black Israelites “initiated” anyway (Sandmann, 2019; The Today Show, 2019). In an interview with Democracy Now!, Nathan Phillips criticized Sandmann’s statement, noting that his team of lawyers and communicators had cherrypicked certain talking-points from Phillips’ initial statement (Democracy Now!, 2019). But by the time the investigation concluded, Bishop of Covington Roger Foys called the students’ behavior “laudatory” (Stead Sellers & Williams, 2019, para. 11). Although Sandmann could not control the circumstances which coalesce into the scene, he still dominated the scene, and, more importantly, the aftermath.

Burkean Scapegoating (Tonn, et al., 1993)

Following the release of Noland’s (2019) video of the incident, many were quick to condemn the actions of the CovCath students. The main target of the public’s ire was Nick Sandmann, immortalized directly in confrontation with the Native American elder. Bishop Foys, who oversees the Catholic high school, even considered “expulsions” (Boorstein, 2019, para. 16). But everything has changed now; there will be no punishments, because no punishments were found to be deserved.

Sandmann’s mortification had to work in conjunction with a shift in perspective of the victim versus the villain. As the first video circulated on the Internet, Nathan Phillips, the Omaha elder, was identified as the victim of Nick Sandmann’s villainy, even by the Catholic school’s own administrators. In the attempt to clear his name, Sandmann and his team utilized Burkean scapegoating, shifting the blame off of the newly-minted agent, Sandmann, and onto the “perfect enemy,” Phillips (Tonn, et al., 1993, p. 229). Who is Nathan Phillips, and how is he the “perfect enemy”?

A longtime Indigenous activist and Marine veteran, involved in the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline (Kleeb, 2019, para. 3; Lakota People’s Law Project, 2019, para. 4), and in attendance in D.C. for the Indigenous Peoples March, Nathan Phillips felt a “spiritual call” to intervene (Schilling, 2019, para. 5). Many regarded him as a hero for attempting to calm the MAGA-hat wearing boys, in a rebuke to the “growing nativist culture” within the United States (Young, 2017, p. 228).

Increasingly muddled by revelations of a now-removed Twitter account, @2020fight (CBS News, 2019, para. 8), the case gave way to a classic “he said, she said” dispute. Much of what Nathan Phillips claimed in his post-event interviews (b.Noland, 2019; King Trévon, 2019) could not be verified, including criticizing the kids for chanting, “build that wall” (b.Noland, 2019; Moran, 2019, p. 2). Instead, Sandmann was determined to be the victim, provoked by his surroundings and incapable of coping with the pressure of the scene. Many now view the incident as instigated by Nathan Phillips, and especially the Black Israelites, provoking the innocent CovCath students. Now, instead of hero, Phillips became the “perfect enemy” of Sandmann, “incarnating” an “inherent threat” to not only Sandmann, but to the social order of an increasingly nativist nation (Tonn, et al., 1993, p. 229; Young, 2017, p. 228).

Framing and Symbolism (Ott & Aoki, 2002)

As this report is being completed, there is a bombshell. Nick Sandmann and his attorneys have filed a lawsuit in Kentucky against The Washington Post, seeking $250 million in damages, citing their “modern day McCarthyism” against white, male, Catholic, MAGA-apparel-wearing persons (Wood, 2019, paras. 3-4). So, despite the aforementioned “perfect enemy” (Phillips), the true villain in this entire case has devolved into, perhaps unsurprisingly under this administration, the mainstream media.

President Trump, in a series of tweets, claimed that the CovCath students were “treated unfairly” and had become “symbols of fake news” (Trump, 2019; b.Trump, 2019). Tucker Carlson, in his namesake primetime Fox News show, and on his conservative news website, The Daily Caller, blamed the liberal media for “not looking too closely” (Carlson, 2019; Athey, 2019). Sandmann’s attorney vowed to get retribution for the “bias and malice” against her client (Stead Sellers & Williams, 2019, para. 20). Originally, remember, when the case first became public, Nick Sandmann was “a symbol of the deep prejudice, hatred, and violence” against Nathan Phillips and all minorities in America, yet now he has become a “martyr” (Ott & Aoki, 2002, pp. 242, 246).

The mainstream media posed a threat to Nick Sandmann due to its nature of “shap[ing] public opinion” (Ott & Aoki, 2002, p. 242). As mentioned, and as expected, social media websites exploded with mentions of #CovingtonCatholic, #NickSandmann, and #NathanPhillips. In fact, thanks to the social media analytics website Brand24, tracking the hashtags aforementioned, as well as #CovCath, #IndigenousPeoplesMarch, and #MarchforLife (but explicitly excluding #abortion), opinions regarding the case were posted over 1,000 times and reached over four million people in just two days. Within a week, opinions on the case had been seen by over fourteen million people [see Fig. 1], mostly due to the nature of “retweets” (Roncallo-Dow, et al., 2019, pg. 130). Just as quickly as he was to condemn, Bishop Foys walked back his statements, having felt “bullied and pressured” to make a brash statement (Foys, 2019, para. 5). For the Internet, this was simply “good melodrama” (Ott & Aoki, 2002, p. 244). They simply will not be able to wait to get a glimpse of the libel trail of the century.