roger ebert on how the press reports mass killings:

Let me tell you a story. The day after Columbine, I was interviewed for the Tom Brokaw news program. The reporter had been assigned a theory and was seeking sound bites to support it. "Wouldn't you say," she asked, "that killings like this are influenced by violent movies?" No, I said, I wouldn't say that. "But what about 'Basketball Diaries'?" she asked. "Doesn't that have a scene of a boy walking into a school with a machine gun?" The obscure 1995 Leonardo Di Caprio movie did indeed have a brief fantasy scene of that nature, I said, but the movie failed at the box office (it grossed only $2.5 million), and it's unlikely the Columbine killers saw it.

The reporter looked disappointed, so I offered her my theory. "Events like this," I said, "if they are influenced by anything, are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event. Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia. The message is clear to other disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see they shouldn't have messed with me. I'll go out in a blaze of glory."

In short, I said, events like Columbine are influenced far less by violent movies than by CNN, the NBC Nightly News and all the other news media, who glorify the killers in the guise of "explaining" them. I commended the policy at the Sun-Times, where our editor said the paper would no longer feature school killings on Page 1. The reporter thanked me and turned off the camera. Of course the interview was never used. They found plenty of talking heads to condemn violent movies, and everybody was happy.


Comments are disabled for this blog post.
  • Actually, Bearlyy, it is easier to opt out of the news now than probably at any time in this country since radio became a mainstay. Think about it. Nowadays most radio stations don't do news. Or you can listen to CDs or satellite radio in your car.

    On TV, there are so many stations that it's no problem whatsoever to avoid the news.

    Nobody under the age of 50 reads newspapers anymore.

    Frankly, as long as it's not something so big that everyone is talking about it, you could easily drop out. And if you don't have anything to do with other people, you could drop out altogether. So if the government is trying to control us with the news, they're not doing a very good job of it.
    BearinFW 12/16/2012 04:26 AM
  • There may be a grain of truth to this, but I don't buy it. The news is the news. Burying your head in the sand won't make it go away. And I think it's important that we try to understand WHY these kind of things happen so often in our country and less so elsewhere. It may, short-term, seem like killers are glorified, but in reality it's not much more than their 15 minutes for most. How many of you could name the Luby's killer, or the guy at Virginia Tech, or even the guy in Colorado, without looking them up? A few, like Charles Whitman, become household names, but those are the exception.

    And I have a hard time believing that even in this celebrity-obsessed country, anybody would seek fame by committing mass murder. Especially in this day and age, when you can get your 15 minutes by posting a clever video on YouTube.

    My own suspicion is that the answer is there isn't one. The motives are as varied as the shooters.
    BearinFW 12/16/2012 01:23 AM
  • TURN OFF THE NEWS.......

    Morgan Freeman's brilliant take on what happened yesterday :

    "You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

    It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single *victim* of Columbine? Disturbed
    people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.

    CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.

    You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news."
    greyhawk 12/15/2012 10:58 PM