In the hallowed halls of Western journalism, a sacred rule endures: when the plot calls for a Muslim, the casting sheet reads “VILLAIN.” It’s a timeless tradition, as reliable as a Hollywood explosion or a news anchor’s grave tone following an “international incident.” But sometimes, a misguided extra forgets the script and does something… heroic. What then? Fear not. The media’s editorial machinery has a protocol for that, too: Strategic Omission.
The recent Bondi Beach shooting—where attackers targeted a Hanukkah celebration—was a textbook example of narrative efficiency. The perpetrators, Pakistani-origin Muslims with alleged ISIS links, were introduced with the full fanfare of terror background music. Cue the ominous cutaways, the expert analysts, the solemn mentions of “global extremism.” A job well done.
Then, a problem: a 43-year-old Syrian-Australian Muslim fruit shop owner, Ahmed al Ahmed, tackled a gunman, took two bullets, and was hailed by police as a “genuine hero.” Even Donald Trump—a man not known for subtlety—praised him. A glorious opportunity to complicate a simplistic narrative! A chance to show that faith isn’t a monolith! But complicating narratives is hard. It’s much easier to just call him… “a bystander.” Or “a man.” Maybe “a local.” “Muslim”? That adjective appears to have been left in the green room.
This isn’t an accident; it’s a craft. For decades, our films and news have perfected the “Good Muslim vs. Bad Muslim” flowchart. Bad Muslim: terrorist, oil sheikh, oppressive patriarch. Good Muslim: quietly assimilated, rarely speaks, and preferably helps the CIA. But a Good Muslim who dramatically stops a Bad Muslim in public? That causes a flowchart error. The system’s response: Download Faith. Reboot as “Generic Brave Person.”
And let’s thank the digital guardians at X (formerly Twitter), where users heroically reported that posts identifying Ahmed as a Muslim were mysteriously becoming less visible. Were they suppressed? Shadow-banned? Lost in the “algorithmic fog of war”? Who can say! It’s just a strange coincidence that keeps happening whenever a Muslim does something that might confuse the branding. The platform’s motto might as well be: “Your heroism is approved, your identity is under review.”
Recall, if you will, the 2024 Bondi Junction stabbing, where Muslim security guards Faraz Tahir and Muhammad Taha confronted the attacker. Their stories initially received the media equivalent of a polite nod before the spotlight swung firmly onto others. The pattern is clear: Muslim villainy is breaking news; Muslim heroism is a footnote—and only if properly sanitised.
This rigorous editorial discipline has real-world benefits! It maintains a clean, simple story for the public: Muslims as a perpetual plot device for fear. Why muddy the waters with humanity, complexity, or facts? Studies show most Westerners have never met a Muslim, so why start now? Let cinema and cable news do the introducing.
There is, of course, some progress. We now have TV shows where Muslims worry about dating and career choices instead of just bomb triggers. How brave! But until news desks and algorithm programmers catch up, we’ll remain in this golden age of selective recognition: quick to name the faith of the villain, and profoundly, professionally hesitant to name the faith of the hero.
So let’s raise a glass to the unseen editors, the algorithmic gatekeepers, and the tradition of narrative hygiene. In the fight against nuance, their work is truly… heroic.
Manufacturing Dissent: Cutting through the propaganda, one omitted detail at a time you can support us by becoming a member. All proceeds go to donations to Gaza.
