The Scapegoating of Virginia Tech

I find it ironic (but not surprising) that Agence France-Presse has provided one of the better reports on the findings of the 147-page report on the Virginia Tech massacre of April 16 (beginning with the fact that they are the only source I have encountered that gave the page count). This report was prepared by an eight-member panel appointed by Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, and it seems to do a good job of affirming my own reflection on April 19 about our "inbred cultural need to affix blame." Indeed, the lead paragraphs of the AFP story give the impression that affixing blame was the primary agenda item for the panel:

Virginia Tech was too slow to inform staff and students about a shooting incident in April that rapidly spiraled into the bloodiest campus massacre in US history, an investigation concluded Wednesday.

The probe by the US state of Virginia said lives might have been saved if not for crucial errors by university police and officials following the early morning shooting of two students on April 16 by mentally disturbed gunman Seung-Hui Cho.

Personally, I see this as yet another example of how we can set priorities that blind us to the realities of the social world. One has to wonder how much effort this panel put into understanding the realities of day-to-day life and work on the Virginia Tech campus from the point of view of students, administrators, the university police, and all other support staff. Indeed, one can wonder further whether any member of the panel could recall those realities from that chapter of personal life history that covered college days (or whether, for too many of the panel members, those realities were only perceived from within the walls of a fraternity or sorority house). There is also, of course, the nagging question of whether or not, in an age of academic budgets cut to the bone, Virginia Tech had the resources to deal with the pathologies of campus life, small or large.

Needless to say, that "inbred cultural need" explains why the report turned out as it did. If the Governor could not find a scapegoat for the blame, then he would be the most likely target. The only way he could cover his rear was to direct the fire elsewhere, and Virginia Tech was the easiest option. However, the trouble with assigning an "institutional scapegoat" is that it punts on the most important part of any post-crisis analysis: identifying action items as a precaution against future crises. The AFP report has little to say about this side of the story. What it does say is not encouraging:

The panel did not recommend any officials be dismissed as a result of the probe and stated that issues such as the right to bear arms and gun control were beyond its scope.

I read this as a "license to ignore action items," which makes me wonder just why the Governor needed those 147 pages in the first place.