What's 'Really' Wrong With the Media and The Virginia Tech Shooter

[JCMach1]

I am horrified by people playing moral arbiters and calling for the removal of the video footage of Cho.

I am just as horrified at the media and how they have used the footage.

Just what is wrong with what the media coverage?:

1. Heavy editing: the video and still photos were heavily edited and censored. The coverage became highly contextualized and ultimately iconic (a kind of Bruce Lee with a Glock)...

2. No analysis: while presenting images in the manner above there was very little analysis of the video or the context.

3. Iconic image fuels hype: it prompts a strong reaction in all directions.



Ultimately, it's not the video or our viewing it that is the problem... it's the media... get it right next time!

[Virginia Dare]

1. Agreed, sensationalizing the whole thing without any respect

whatsoever for the victims or their families. No journalistic standards in evidence at all, just blatant tabloidism. They've turned into a pack of ghoulish monsters.

[FrenchieCat]

2. The media has been broken for a long, long time!

It just happens that folks are starting to take notice, one at a time, as the media offends more and more of us.

Just keep watching, in particular, as the respective primaries for the presidency heat up.......because I can say with confidence right now, you aint' seen nothing yet!

[KharmaTrain]

3. If It Bleeds, It Leads...

The irony is some who are outraged by NBC showing the excerpts of Cho's junk have no qualms if this were the repeated showing of a blown up market in Baghdad or more Abu Grahb pictures. We're all adults out here...or one would hope so...if one finds this material disturbing or offensive, turn it off. One would think the families would be secluded and not paying attention to what the corporate media is doing...if it were me, I'd tell 'em to bug off...and that leads to where the overkill is.

This story has now turned into a "human interest" one. We're being bombarded with hours of cheap and easy "interviews" and "investigations" that are heavy on emotion, little on substance. It's the material you expect in People, not something that belongs on a hard news channel. What relevance does Franklyn Graham have to any of this? Or do we really need to get this breathtaking look into the killer's empty and non-descript dorm room? It's truly a tragedy, but is it "news" to put one of the deasesed friend on camera and let them get emotional while the bobble-head puts on some faux pity or indignation. This is always painful to watch and is just as exploitive as running the killer's images.

The media lives for tragedy...it's what brings eyes to their channels and how resumes are written. It's mellodrama turned on high and no cliche or hyperbole is left unchecked as the anchors and reporters outdo each other to "be in the moment". I have hit the saturation point here...once the memorials begin, it's time to see what the Discovery Channel is showing.