|
news
Hoax
letters could be a vent for anger
By Miriam
Dunn
The spate of hoax Anthrax letters that have been sent to both public
entities and private residences over the past few weeks have triggered
anger and outrage among the public and also our politicians. But
according to one psychologist, their sender, or senders, may well
simply be venting their frustration at an establishment which won’t
listen to them.
In last week’s edition, MaltaToday revealed that over 300
people had been given antibiotics as a precautionary measure after
coming into contact with suspicious packages, mostly at Malta’s
post offices. The spate of scares, all of which have so far proved
to be hoaxes, started about one month ago, hot on the heels of
the Anthrax alert in the United States. So far, three people have
been arraigned on suspicion of sending the incriminating letters.
The incidents, which are proving to be highly costly, in terms
of finance, time and resources, have been lamented by parliamentarians
in the House and the public officials called in to deal with the
scares. But psychologist Charles Azzopardi has a different perception
of the perpetrators.
Asked what would cause someone to send such a letter, he explains
that there are a number of factors involved and stresses that
although a perpetrator might just send a hoax letter for a joke,
in many such instances, the motives run much deeper.
"Firstly, if someone is looking to avenge the authorities,
or someone in particular, they may well decide that this is the
right moment," he says. "Perpetrators would have the
satisfaction that they would get an immediate reaction to what
they have done and that the reaction would be quite extensive,
creating a great deal of panic."
Mr Azzopardi adds that someone who wants to inflict some sort
of punishment on an enemy but doesn’t have the courage to
face their adversary squarely might also take the opportunity
to get their revenge this way. He also believes that such incidents
may well be the end-result of a build-up of frustration at an
establishment that is not providing a channel for someone to express
his frustration or anger.
"If someone is illiterate, not very good at expressing himself
or perhaps simply can’t get to communicate with another person,
such as a politician or a public official who is high up, detached
or unavailable, then tension and frustration can build up and
spill over into this form of release," he explains. "People
might want to vent their anger, or make a complaint about something
and simply haven’t found the way to do it."
He suggests that while arraigning people in court might look
to be the natural course of events, it is also worth examining
the problem of a chain of communication that may well be far from
satisfactory.
"Perhaps we could examine our communication channels and
look at improving them," Mr Azzopardi says. "Facilitating
the way people can express their opinions and getting to the root
of the problem rather than just punishing people would be a positive
move."
|
