The way Crafty Sousepaw and yerfatma put it sums it all up exactly for me. I think proper coverage would have a prominent focus on the victims and less focus that panders to our fascination with insanity and the macabre. (Sousepaw) I don't believe it was necessary or appropriate for NBC to release as much information about the package the killer sent them as they did. It was a reach for our desire to get inside the mind of the killer, the effect of which is the creation of a "legend" of sorts. (Sousepaw) Airing all the pictures of this guy posing with his guns was ridiculous. What purpose did it serve? If this is basically the last thing your child had to see prior to being gunned down, would you want these types of images plastered all over? Media outlets who put these pictures out were doing it for no other reason than to attract viewers. Am I weird for thinking the ideal amount of coverage would be almost none at all? (Yerfatma) All acts like this, and terrorism in general, is done for one, specific reason: To gain attention and notoriety. Unfortunately, many individuals, young people included, will attempt suicide. It's not too much of a reach to envision them wanting to make some huge, tragic impact before they go. The media, in this country especially, pander to the wants of crazed individuals, not because they're doing society a favor; they're selfishly trying to one-up their competitors. This wacked-out kid played the media like a fiddle. He was nothing before this tragedy, now everyone knows everything about him, and won't forget him (until, of course, someone does something even worse, God forbid). NBC should have handed the items this guy sent to them over to the authorities, and that should have been the extent of it. I read it somewhere that NBC broadcasting this stuff wasn't journalism; it was opening mail.
Interesting comments, thanks y'all. I'm inclined to most agree with yerfatma, i.e., "almost none at all", for a couple of different reasons, chiefly respect for the dead and their loved ones. As for the contention that publicizing such acts inspires others, I believe that that's true to a degree, but with important caveats. Going on a rampage like this is like being a suicide bomber: whatever else happens, you end up dead. It's not something you do unless you're hard-core alienated and antisocial, and you fail to see any alternatives. If that's the case, you'll look at something like Columbine, as this latest nutjob did, and conclude that that's the sensible thing to do. But most weird loner geek kids who get teased like this guy did, or like Harris and Klebold were, get over it -- some because they've got a genuinely forgiving spirit, but most probably because they see that letting it go and getting on with life is a better option for them. The irony of Columbine was that in many cases, instead of inspiring schools to reach out and create a more humane environment for the loner geek kids, it seems to have resulted in their regarding these kids as ticking time bombs, further increasing their isolation. Change that, and you change the whole outcome. No amount of media coverage of any kind can "inspire" someone to do a nutty if they look at the end for the result for the killer -- he had his "revenge", sure, but now he's both dead and reviled -- and can come up with anything that looks better.
The irony of Columbine was that in many cases, instead of inspiring schools to reach out and create a more humane environment for the loner geek kids, it seems to have resulted in their regarding these kids as ticking time bombs Word, and thus my disbelief in the ability of the media to educate. Every cynic a disappointed romantic, I suppose.
I dont think it can be less likely but the way it has been covered has made it more likely. There are a lot of kids out there with similar issues and all this does is feed the monster. This person felt they were an outcast and treated poorly. No one knew who he was. HE claimed "now people will know who I am" and they do. Every kid like this can now have someone to relate to and a way in their mind to finally be recognized by all those who cast them asided This is a great point, b/c apparently Hui made a reference to the killers at Littleton, equating them with martyrdom. So it looks like that (over)coverage of that event had a somewhat direct effect on Hui's actions. All that to say that we should quit broadcasting it on national tv. And yes, i'm aware of the irony of me getting that info from the media and then blaming the media for contributing to the problem. At times i'm guilty of being a part of the problem.
At times i'm guilty of being a part of the problem. We all are sometimes without even realizing it. Look at the way most of the public views Pro athletes. It's the whole negative press factor. Look at our community here. The negative threads are 5 times as long as the positive and 10 times more likely to appear. We are all part of the viewing public and we all believe we have the right to know everything (freedom of the press). Negative stories in any medium are way more abundant. It seems we would rather express our outrage then our appreciation. Cases in point. Note the post count difference in the threads were the topic is one that might draw a comment like, 'nice post', or 'good story, thanks', vs. a thread or link in which someone is in trouble, arrested, or punished. Recent positive threads, here , and here. Recent negative threads, here, and here. Recently we have paid more attention to the threads that involve people getting into trouble, than we have paid to threads where prominent sports figures die. Notice the post count here, and here. Is it our nature? I'm not sure. It just seems like a popular topic when we point out down falls, punishments or anything negative. Isn't dieing negative? Sure it is, I guess those posts aren't as long unless there is someone to blame in them.
Bishop i appreciate your point; it is well taken. I think that humans do have a propensity to think on the macabre and sinister, and also to see others fall and judge. Why that is the case is another subject for debate, but it does seem likely that we can all sympathize with your point. The best thing we can do is not participate in the media circus.
Am I weird for thinking the ideal amount of coverage would be almost none at all? We've had shootings like this before, at schools and elsewhere and none of the coverage amounts to much more than gawking at a car wreck on the highway. It happened, but unless you know the people involved or can somehow help, drive on. We're not going to stop people from snapping and banning access to guns wouldn't make that much of a difference. Putting Wolf Blitzer/ David Gregory/ Spider Jerusalem on the scene and shoving a mic in front of anyone tangentially related with enough of a class-impairment to answer "What was he like in the first grade?" doesn't do anything except make people sit through ads. Very well put yerfatma, one of your best. Look at what happened after 9/11, movie studios made movies telling the victims perspective of what transpired on Flight 93 and also a movie about the WTC attack. Those movies were making those vcictims out to be heros more than victims. Both movies were showing the american public and anyone else that saw them look at the resolve of our citizens, even when faced with certain death and unarmed they will fight until the end(flight 93). If you saw the movie World Trade Center, it was a true story about two PA cops that made it out of the pile. Another story of resolve and strength. Neither movies glorified the terrorists. That crap that was shown on NBC just made the VT shooter a hero to any kid who is picked on to much, or doesn't feel like he fits in. It already started today with the copycat crap, it was in another thread there were 3 or 4 of us that had kids with bomb threats at school.
Hey jojomfd1, I can understand how some people would want to say, "Oh, they made heros out of the victims" but the fact of the matter is, some of the people that lost loved ones in that tragedy are not interested in re-living that horrific day for what some would like to call 'entertainment'.
I can completely understand that, and that is not what was meant by my post. I was just pointing out the differences in the airing of the two.
some of the people that lost loved ones in that tragedy are not interested in re-living that horrific day for what some would like to call 'entertainment'. Very good point. I'm sure several writers are hard at work this very minute trying to put out a screenplay on these events. Also, the network crime investigation shows are probably meeting to discuss what would be an appropriate time to wait until they can air an episode that deals with a situation that closely resembles Virginia Tech. Network TV is the worst culprit there is, and their bullshit attitude about giving a damn about anyone or anything but their own ratings is pathetic. How many shows deal with killings and murder? We're supposed to gobble this stuff up every day of the week, then turn around and act like these networks are actually concerned when people are gunned down in real life? What a bunch of hypocrites! Last night me, my wife and young daughter sit down to watch "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader." My daughter loves that show, and it's on from 8 to 9 p.m. But it never fails that during that show, of all things, there's usually a commercial or two aired for some horror movie or killer flick, such as "Disturbia." We always have to be on our toes in order to change the channel, or to tell our daughter to just turn away or plug her ears. It's a cause I seriously feel like doing something about.
But it never fails that during that show, of all things, there's usually a commercial or two aired for some horror movie or killer flick, such as "Disturbia." We always have to be on our toes in order to change the channel, or to tell our daughter to just turn away or plug her ears. It's a cause I seriously feel like doing something about. The younger they can get them used to seeing it the sooner they believe the kids will think it is normal and ok. How else are the going to keep recruitment for the armed forces up, especially the special forces. Not that I have anything against anyone who has served or is serving. But you can't tell me it's not part of it.
BornIcon, I checked to see if you had an email in your profile and you did not. So I'll say it here, sorry if my post was misunderstood. I can completely understand why alot of people would not want to have those images and feelings rehashed all the time. So if I struck a nerve I deeply apologize.
I had an uncle that perished in the WTC attack so I just know that me and my family want nothing to do with any movie(s) that deals with this situation. You don't have to apologize jojomfd1 but I do appreciate it. Thank you
BTW, I posted my email address on another post but her it is again. If anyone wants to reach me, please do so at: bornicon77@verizon.net I'll be more than happy to reply to your emails~
Suggestion: post it in your profile and save yourself the keystrokes.
Thanks for the suggestion LBB but I rather just put it up when someone asks for it. It's not a hassle to me at all~
