About NBC’s decision to air portions of Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung-Hui’s “multimedia manifesto,” commenter Angrier and Angrier writes:
Is it me, or is it outrageous that the media are doing exactly what this psycho Cho wanted by airing his s**t on TV? There was a time when the news media wouldn’t have done this. All NBC and the like are doing is encouraging the next Cho/Klebold/Harris, etc… by demonstrating that they can, indeed, get the 15-minutes of infamy they crave by killing innocent people and sending a tape into a TV network.
Ron Coleman agrees, stating bluntly that “the blood of the victims of the ‘next one’ is on the hands of everyone in the decision-making chain at NBC for this utterly inexcusable decision.” (Hat tip: InstaPundit.) The American Spectator’s Happy Feder also blasts NBC, and plays the Imus card in the process: “Don Imus calls some young women ‘nappy headed hos’ and we’re all supposed be to shocked, shocked I tell you…but I guess it’s okay for NBC is going to realize Cho’s dreams of celebrity status at the expense of 32 lives.” Feder adds:
To run the Cho video is a vile act. It doesn’t take a genius to know other whack jobs are out there watching. Maybe even a terrorist or two. They’ll see how easy it is to spit in the face of America. Just make a nice little video, mail it off, whip out a few guns and start pulling the trigger.
Ann Althouse, by contrast, defends NBC, writing that “professional journalism isn’t about expressing condemnation or praise. It’s about reporting newsworthy facts.” And NBC News President Steve Capus defending his decision by saying, “This is I think as close as we will ever come to being inside of the mind of a killer, and I thought that it needed to be released. Pretty much every single news organization all around the world has made the same decision, that it was appropriate to release this information.”
However, that last statement appears to be demonstrably wrong, given that the editor-in-chief of CBC News says his network made a different decision:
At the CBC, we debated the issue throughout the evening and made the decision that we would not broadcast any video or audio of this bizarre collection. On CBC Television, Radio and CBC.ca, we would report the essence of what the killer was saying, but not do what he so clearly hoped all media would do. To decide otherwise - in our view -would be to risk copycat killings. Speaking personally, I have long admired NBC News and I am sure my admiration of their journalists will endure. But I think their handling of these tapes was a mistake. As I watched them last night, sickened as I’m sure most viewers were, I imagined what kind of impact this broadcast would have on similarly deranged people. In horrific but real ways, this is their 15 seconds of fame. I had this awful and sad feeling that there were parents watching these excerpts on NBC who were unaware they they will lose their children in some future copycat killing triggered by these broadcasts.
Thoughts?
|
Categories: The Media & Blogs
|
April 19th, 2007 at 11:22:07 am
I think all of these news outlets should instead show this tribute to the VT community,
http://www.forthehokies.com
It is a collage of hundred of college logos in support of the VT community created by several facebook users.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:24:32 am
. . . stating bluntly that “the blood of the victims of the ‘next one’ is on the hands of everyone in the decision-making chain at NBC for this utterly inexcusable decision.”
Well, that’s clearly ridiculous. But I’m not sure what to make of this situation. On the one hand, the tapes are clearly newsworthy. Like it or not, Cho did realize his ‘dream’ of celebrity status. That’s not really NBC’s fault. You can make a name for yourself by gunning down innocent lives; that doesn’t mean that news organizations should ignore or downplay facts because other insane people might also like to gain notoriety in an equally heinous manner.
On the other hand, devoting entire segments of your broadcast to the shooter’s insane ramblings seems both creepy and excessive to me. I don’t think it’s necessary for news organizations to report everything that the tape says, and air his statements directly to us without first coming up with a framework that doesn’t make it seem like we’re just watching him lecture to us about his ‘reasons’ for mass murder.
I guess what I’m saying is that, were the decision up to me, I would have of course reported on the tapes. I would have shown images from them, and described what he was saying. I would probably not have aired them in the manner NBC did (full audio and video, etc.), essentially giving the killer a direct feed to the audience.
But I don’t fault NBC for handling it in another way. I can’t deny that the tapes are incredibly compelling.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:24:55 am
“professional journalism isn’t about expressing condemnation or praise. It’s about reporting newsworthy facts.”
Professional journalism is an editorial process, not a free avenue for the rantings of a nutcase. The media could have covered this without running Cho’s diatribes unedited. They could have read a brief statement about what was contained in the package and showed one or two still photos. Instead, they use millions of dollars in air time to spew Cho’s hateful vomit on the entire nation, per his wishes, with the possible consequence of encouraging the next whack-job to murder dozens of people for similar celebrity.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:34:27 am
And people used to wonder what the point of this movie was…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-l4sp9QGCVU
…We’re basically living it.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:50:42 am
I think there are good arguments both for why NBC should or should not have aired the video. I just wonder if part of the reason they did it was to prevent it from somehow leaking out. If people heard about it but were unable to see any of it, I think that would drive the desire for people to somehow get their hands on it. I mean, look at how desperate people were to see the original version of the South Park Cartoon Wars II episode with Mohammed in it. That was such a small thing, and yet it was all over blogs and message boards, and it even caused a traffic spike on here that was visible on Brendan’s recent graph of his overall blog traffic through the years. With something as big as this, I wouldn’t be shocked if some intern or someone at NBC managed to get a bootleg copy and put it on the internet. And if that was done, parts that NBC chose not to air because they were definitely inappropriate might be seen.
Also, I watched NBC News last night to see the video, and I can say that reading about it in a news story would have had no where near the impact that watching it did. Without watching it, I really don’t think I would have fully understood how sick Cho was as I do now. Maybe that’s one benefit, is that we can see that this was not just the result of video games or gun control laws, but that Cho was a time bomb just waiting to go off.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:51:25 am
Exceedingly minor quibble — Capus said “pretty much” every news organization, so one counter-example does not make Capus’s statement “demonstrably wrong.”
April 19th, 2007 at 11:52:28 am
Double A, I was thinking more of TAXI DRIVER. To me this is that movie (without the underage prostitute). But apparently this nutty Korean was immitating a japanese shoot-up a little more recently released.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:53:00 am
[…] Joyner has a different view and Brendan Loy and Michelle Malkin are also blogging about […]
April 19th, 2007 at 11:55:02 am
Victims’ families are cancelling appearances on NBC shows…
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2007-04-19T144342Z_01_N19398228_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-CRIME-SHOOTING-NBC.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
Lisa-
To your point, my concern is this is setting a new standard for future murderers to do this kind of thing. If Cho gets on TV for 32 murders, how many murders will it take for the next nut-job to get on TV? When infamy is the main goal of people like Cho/Harris, etc, NBC’s decision is like throwing gasoline on the fire.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:58:04 am
Authorities investigating the crime have problems with NBC’s decision…
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1261402,00.html
April 19th, 2007 at 12:09:08 pm
Angrier,
I read that story about the authorities being upset with NBC’s decision too, though I don’t understand how NBC’s airing the video and showing the photos can harm their investigation. I agree that people aren’t used to seeing that type of thing, and that it can be shocking. I think Williams might have been a little more cautionary about the video before they showed it. While it was disturbing, I didn’t feel personally disturbed by it, but I’m sure many did.
What I wonder about is that you said that infamy was Cho’s main goal, but we really don’t know that. I have no doubt that it was a goal of his, if not initially then at least eventually. I think if he was doing this just to be famous, he would have been sure to get NBC’s address. My bf and I were actually discussing this. I feel like he probably decided to send these things in at the last minute, since it’s common knowledge that NBC’s headquarters are at 30 Rockefeller Plaza (though he was a little off). I honestly have no clue as to the addresses of ABC’s or CBS’s headquarters.
As far as the decision to air, I think NBC was trying to help the public answer the question they all have: Why? The video and images clearly show that Cho was a sick and disturbed individual who was planning this for some time. I think it provides another small piece of the puzzle. At least it did for me.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:15:35 pm
One week ago Mr. Capus sanctimoniously fired Don Imus for off-handed extemporaneous bad judgement and inflamatory insulting remarks. This week, after deliberate thought, he lets on the air material potentially far more damaging. He has validated the sick fantasy of a crazed killer, and actually was complicit in completing the whole tragedy by allowing the killer his closing commentary. I could make a lot of negative ad hominem remarks about Mr Capus as a caricature of a network executive between cocaine fixes, but I won’t.
Mike Tichon ND ‘64
April 19th, 2007 at 12:19:41 pm
It is horrifying to see how the media has become the modern age colliseum where avid expectators can fill their minds with mundane manifestoes and insane minds. What right does Fox News have, for example, to keep prying for answers as to what happen at VT and who is to be blamed? How irresponsible is it to assume that the “signs were there all along.” Last night Cavuto was interviewing some girls from VT and these girls very intelligently stated that it is up to ‘them’ to find solace through unity and stopped short of reprimanding the media for their irresponsibility. Fox News is also prancing on the edges of the news, for they truly understand that they could say something that might offend others or insult the VT institution. None of the media is doing us a favor by repeatedly bombarding us to attrition with the videos and pictures of the shooter. It seems that to me that the media is fomenting and inculcating the same behavior that not only shocks but that brings so much pain and anguish to the lives of so many people; especially, those of us who are part of the academia. And today, nonetheless, Fox News makes the statement about their policy regarding showing these videos as if telling us they have been so diligent and responsible in making sure they have filtered things out for the viewers. The bottom line is that the media is intent in showing these videos because they have nothing better to shock us with. I would think that these videos of a mad mind are not suitable material for children watching them. Again, the same rhethoric applies in the question on whether guns or people kill people: Do we blame the viewers or do we blame the media? Sadly, when tragic events like this take place you would expect the media to help bring unity and find means to a more peaceful existence among all individuals and sense of goodness and dignity in all. I think they have succeeded in doing just the opposite.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:45:15 pm
The tape would have appeared on youtube in a week because some staffer would have stolen a copy and posted it.
NBC did what every other news organization would have done and hell I was curious to see what “it” looked like and to read some of his thoughts.
they were in a no win situation either IMHO because on the other side there would have people and other news orgs that would have demanded that the tapes be released under the Freedom of Information Act.
as a New Yorker it reminds me of 9/11 in so many ways because I watched the 2nd plane enter WTC 2 then I went home, numb, and watched the news for the next 24 hrs non stop! I was there yet I could not look away and wanted to see more.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:48:23 pm
Lisa-
I would dare say that the very fact Cho put together this package and sent to NBC - in the midst of his rampage - PROVES that infamy was his main goal. As for FOIA and YouTube, the fact this could have happened doesn’t validate NBC’s decision to do what it did.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:02:13 pm
The media airs Bin Laden’s tapes so to say that now NBC news has shown people that you can be famous for killing people isnt really accurate.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:06:23 pm
GR-
No U.S. network has aired Bin Laden’s tapes in full and unedited. My point is NBC has given carte blanche to Cho.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:10:16 pm
Angrier,
They did edit the tape. They didn’t show it in its entirety; they only showed a couple of clips from it. They said that most of it was inappropriate to show.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:17:05 pm
…would have demanded that the tapes be released under the Freedom of Information Act.
Heh. I wasn’t aware that NBC is now considered a government agency subject to FOIA.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:18:08 pm
Copies had been handed over to the authorities, so I would think FOIA could come into play.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:18:48 pm
Brendan-
I would like to get your take on this. I imagine you are formulating an opinion.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:22:31 pm
Copies had been handed over to the authorities, so I would think FOIA could come into play.
Maybe, but 1) just because someone files an FOIA claim doesn’t mean it will be approved, and 2) how/why would protecting federal agencies from an unwanted FOIA claim have anything to do with NBC’s decision-making process? That makes no sense.
Anyway, I’m still formulating my opinion, and am quite torn at the moment.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:25:46 pm
Brendan-
Regarding FOIA, I don’t know why that or YouTube would be the motivating factor if the decision is being made based on journalistic considerations and not on commercial considerations.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:27:03 pm
Well, to provide food for thought, how does this square with your take on South Park showing an image of Muhammed in terms of the potential for inciting violence?
April 19th, 2007 at 1:33:21 pm
I don’t think it’s relevant at all. On the one hand, you’re dealing with an organized group of religious/ideological radicals whose specific purpose is to use violence to silence free speech, and you’re obsequiously giving into them, thus handing them a victory. On the other hand, you’re dealing with a bunch of isolated crazy people who aren’t specifically trying to exert pressure on you to do anything in particular, and the question is whether to make a prudential judgment that it would be better not to feed their irrational tendencies. Just totally separate issues. Freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas aren’t pervasively threatened in this case, whether NBC decides to air or not air the video. Freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas is pervasively threatened if our media effectively turns its decision-making processes over to the whims of violent mobs of religious fanatics who are quite likely to try the same tactic again.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:40:00 pm
I agree with Brendan. I realize I brought up the South Park issue, but only to make a point that people were so desperate to get their hands on it that there was even a fake video circulating claiming to be the edited portion. I was just trying to point out that if none of the video was shown, it might have created an even greater demand and have promoted ridiculous speculation as to the content.
I agree with you Angrier that this was probably largely commercially motivated. Unfortunately, I think that’s what we’ve made the media into these days.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:40:36 pm
While I still think Comedy Central was being prudent and was within its rights not to show the episode, I appreciate your reasoning on the difference between the two situations.
April 19th, 2007 at 2:04:04 pm
Note: I see that my Public Records and Terrorism-related points have by now already been discussed; but what the hell, here’s what I wrote anyway. / Far be it from Mee to Censor myself merely because I’m Wrong. ~ JL :)
Nebraska 94 et seq., re 9/11, you Got it ~ & are the first Herein to Say it.
Should the media Not have aired those WTC Destruction tapes ~ at All, I mean, apart from the How Constantly Repeated question ~ which they had obtained from various random sources? Those, after all, were video showing the actual murders of 2,700+ people. / Re the recorded Rantings of Murderers, should they Not show bin Laden’s? al Zawahiri’s? etc.? / Should the NYT Not have printed, in full, the Unabomber’s (sp? Uni?) disjointed rambling incoherent crazyass Manifesto, which he had Mailed to them? / Should we Not see the horrendous scenes of even Greater mass death & destruction coming out of Iraq every single goddamn Day? / and So forth.
Of Course they should, and We should. They, and We, must.
Yes, it’s very very Hard on the victims’ loved ones. And yes, it might provide additional incentive for copycat wackoes ~ though they’ve already got Plenty of that just from the Previous reportage, which unavoidably guaranteed Cho’s notoriety anyway. // But such considerations, while legitimate ones, cannot become a news organization’s Top criterion.
Bolstering the Inevitable Disclosure point made by Lisa and others, is the possibility that as Evidence properly provided to the Authorities these materials might in due cours have become Public Records in any event. (Lawyers? Yes? No?)
“Sadly, when tragic events like this take place you would expect the media to help bring unity and find means to a more peaceful existence among all individuals and sense of goodness and dignity in all.”
uscroger, I would expect, say, the North Korean media to do ~ according to Its own lights ~ exactly that. / But if NBC News put that in its Vision Statement and proceeded accordingly, I would personally March on 30 Rock with a Picket sign inviting them “To Hell or to Pyongyang”. ;> // Now Rev. Franklyn Graham, on the other hand, did a Fine job of such worthy (really) homilization in a CNN interview yesterday. He representats the kind of institutions from whom I DO expect, and appreciate, that. (In the course of the sermon he seemed to be directly Evangelizing at Wolf Blitzer, btw, which was rather Enjoyable :)
I share the Gripe about the media’s obligatory Rush to Judgement against the V.T. Administration, the Cops, the Shrinks, the Gun Culture, and So forth ~ for which I indict not only Fox but also CNN’s intolerably-blithering Paula Zahn, and others. These fools stubbornly adhere to an incorrigibly Secular-Gnostic (sorry Becky :) worldview which, Ironically, radically distorts the Truth behind the News. (A propos of which, here is an interesting Take.)
But, should they Suppress or Soft-pedal the Bad news, in all its illustrated Awfulness, to Spare our delicate sensibilities? Hell, No. (Actually, seeing & hearing the monster himself may provide a partial Antidote to the bubbleheaded blitherings of misdirected Blame.)
April 19th, 2007 at 2:11:01 pm
“representats”, indeed :). Somesort of a Soviet Bureau that is, I think. :> Erratum: “He represents the kind of institutions…” etc. ;]
April 19th, 2007 at 2:11:38 pm
Good. I beat Alasdair to it. :)
April 19th, 2007 at 2:48:16 pm
“doesn’t validate NBC’s decision to do what it did.”
NBC does not have to validate anything it was there property mailed to them and the brass upstairs knew they would catch flack for airing it and decided that it was the right thing to do and I agree with them.
It’s not like they aired him actually shooting people which by the way I believe there is video or pics of but the decency issue ranges from person to person and this is a business and there logo will always been seen when these pics and videos are shown. like it or not
April 19th, 2007 at 3:00:11 pm
NBC apparently feels it has to validate what it did because it keeps trying to explain why it did it. I think NBC was concerned Cho sent this to more than one outlet and ran with it as quickly as possible to get it out on the air first. Now it finds itself in the position of having to defend what it did.
The difference between this and 9/11 is that the networks were showing 9/11 live. EVERYONE had footage of it. It was out there before anyone had time to think about it.
This is a specific diatribe from a deranged killer produced specifically for the purpose of taunting the country after the worst shooting incident in the country’s history. The tape was sent to ONE outlet. NBC could have restricted the use of it. Instead, the network exercised virtually no editorial control and gave a huge platform to a dead lunatic.
April 19th, 2007 at 3:03:24 pm
Due to the growing backlash, Fox has stopped using the footage and other networks are cutting back…
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,267088,00.html
…For better or worse, the mob has spoken. Too bad the horse is out of the barn.
April 19th, 2007 at 3:31:26 pm
Agree w Angrier too about the incentivizing. And think of the VT living victims too. One consolation perhaps is that your persecutor is dead, but he keeps coming to life everynight as a celebrity, notorious, albeit.
April 19th, 2007 at 3:43:16 pm
“The difference between this and 9/11 is that the networks were showing 9/11 live. EVERYONE had footage of it. It was out there before anyone had time to think about it.”
Agreed. but what about the replays? or are you suggesting that once the cat is out of the bag then it does not matter anymore? because as I recall the majority of Americans were in transit that morning and the news networks could have just stopped airing the footage by deeming the site not fit or approiate for viewing especially since small kids could watch 2,700+ people die.
A&A
I understand your point believe me I do but I also believe that you are upset at the wrong people as you I and I both know that for every person you can find to say that it was inappropriate to show the video I can find people to say that NBC did the right thing.
April 19th, 2007 at 3:48:59 pm
Mark Buerhle threw a no-hitter …
April 19th, 2007 at 4:12:14 pm
Nebraska-
I appreciate your point of view, but this is not a popularity contest. The difference between the blogosphere and journalism is editorial judgement. If NBC News isn’t going to exercise editorial judgement, it deserves to have its market share eaten away by the Brendanloy.com’s of the world until it has more in common with the National Inquirer than a reputable news organization.
April 19th, 2007 at 4:14:51 pm
No offense, Brendan. But hopefully you understand what I mean.
April 19th, 2007 at 4:28:56 pm
“exercise editorial judgement”
which news organization will stand up and tell NBC they were wrong?
your right this is not a popularity contest its business and sometimes not so popular decisions have to be made….like laying off 35k workers right before the holidays.
April 19th, 2007 at 4:40:09 pm
Fox News, for one. And the CBC.
April 19th, 2007 at 4:46:06 pm
Let’s face it. A lot of young kids saw the events from Monday unfold right before their eyes. I coach 7th and 8th grade boys lacrosse and the majority of the kids were off on Monday because of the weather and those who were not saw everything unfold online and on TV. 99% of them were disturbed and saddened by what they saw.
NBC didn’t even preface the tapes from Cho yesterday with a “this may be disturbing to some viewers” type warning. The images and words were graphic and violent. This is the guy responsible for the death of 32 innocent people…and NBC brought him right into your living room…whether you wanted it or not.
Put it up online…preface it with a warning…just don’t shove it down our throats simply because you want the ratings or wanted to “break” the story.
April 19th, 2007 at 4:52:45 pm
A-ROD, 3 RUN WALK OFF HOME RUN!!!
April 19th, 2007 at 5:32:19 pm
News is about educating people about events that affect them. When the news is educating the public it is at its height of legitimacy. NBC was not educating anyone about anything when it aired those tapes. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that a person who will go out and shoot 30+ people he doesn’t know is sick in the head. The tapes did nothing but accomplish exactly what that sicko wanted.
Furthermore, contrary to NBC’s opinion, the news is not about publishing all information that you get your hands on. Stating this denies any ethical duty which a news reporter may have. The Society of Professional Journalism, for instance, lists that reporters have the following duties:
# Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
# Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
# Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
# Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
# Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
NBC has violated every single one of these tenets. With power necessarily come responsibilities. The media simply claims that it has none.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:42:43 pm
I have to say, I agree with A & A. This just should not have been shown. There is no reason to give this guy the one thing he wanted - attention. As was mentioned, this will only encourage more of this (or at least make some people think “I might die, but my message will be broadcast on TV” - and that’s more important to some people sometimes.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:48:02 pm
What’s with Fox usage of the word “Evil.” Are they using the such to refer some relevance to the Bible or is it just another propagandistic tool? Is there a modern definition of the word evil? Maybe another thread on the subject would be ideal!!!
April 19th, 2007 at 5:49:59 pm
I agree with B. Minch. Furthermore, look at the benefits and risks of providing such blatantly inappropriate material to the public. The benefit is seeing the killer’s blood lust and “finding out how sick he really is” (as if that was hard to tell from the fact that he shot over 30 students in class). The risks on the other hand are the risks that people will imitate him, thus further endangering innocent students. The risk of presenting this material is simply too substantial to even consider posting it. I’m sure everyone will be comforted by the fact that they got to see “how really sick this guy was”, when someone copies his media-provided blueprint to a T in sick cult-like fashion.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:53:51 pm
Drive-By Journalism
Those tenets have not been adherd to by ANY of the news shows for at least the last 15 years maybe even further
those tenets look good in journalism class but they are on the wall in abc, cbs and nbc for decorations
the next, “it” will not get this publicity because 1st he/she/it has to top what has been done and if that tragedy happens the media will never air the manifesto of the perp
“it” is a one time deal for the media as the lesson has been learned but we all know that someone has to be 1st
April 19th, 2007 at 5:55:32 pm
Father Loy has a lot of great points–as usual. Point well taken regarding the previous discussion in regards to the moral obligations of the media. And I tend to agree that the “living history” can retell an event and keep it alive for the generations to try to avoid the such from repeating. But, the responsbility would also imply that such knowledge is not done at the expense to inflict further mental distress upon those who have already seen so much pain. In other words, I don’t have to see the actual torture and torments in a gas chamber. The implication exists and it is understood that the Holocaust did take place. In any event, you mentioned something on another thread regarding the nonsensical idea of putting the ‘freaky-acting under scrutiny. Should rap lyrics fall under this category of freaky-acting?
April 19th, 2007 at 5:56:33 pm
USCroger. Did you seriously take issue with the use of the word evil in referring to that demented killer?
Get out a dictionary and quit being an idiot:
Evil -
1 a : morally reprehensible, b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct
or if you prefer:
3 a : causing harm
Hmmm…I wonder if slaughtering innocent students fits that definition.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:57:32 pm
Perhaps we could turn off the TVs. I know it’s difficult, and kids could see it elsewhere, but instead of whining, why not turn off the TV and watch what your kids are watching.
Frankly, this video is less repulsive than the Columbine, WTC, RFK, JFK, Jack Ruby and Waco videos. At least no one in the video is being killed or shot.
Modern news is for ratings and $$, not to educate. Yes, NBC released the photos because they would make money. Welcome to the free market. Go ahead and whine about the good old days, but the fact is it has been a long time since the news cared for anything more than $$. (Watch Clooney’ Goodnight and Goodluck for comparison).
April 19th, 2007 at 6:08:18 pm
Folks, please—do your television sets not have a power button like mine does? If not, pull the plug out of the outlet and be free! Turn off the endless loop if it offends you. And for God’s sake, do not let children watch this stuff without an adult present–if at all.
I manage to be an informed citizen by reading three newspapers, listening to NPR, checking Brendan’s blog as well as other internet sites, so I was not traumatized by viewing Cho’s tape. I am certain I can access it within a minute if I chose to.
But blame NBC because the 24/7 sites are running this endlessly? Please—you are adults, and must realize what is behind these outlets. You were just complaining about the endless Anna Nicole Smith coverage, and you saw what happened to Don Imus because they had a quiet holiday weekend to fill. Do you think they were mulling over the free speech implications of fanning the flames that led to silencing him?
You cannot believe they are thinking about what is in your best interest, do you?
As James Carville put it so long ago, it’s the economy ($), stupid.
I just heard Brian Williams on NPR—NBC immediately contacted federal authorities when they discovered what they had, discussed whether to air it all day and sought input from authorities as well. It was edited. Sounds rather responsible to me.
Again, you are in control of the media you are exposed to. Chose your outlets. And feel free to turn it all off. They’ll get your message when you hit them at the bottom line.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:22:33 pm
Drive-by-Media:
You’re one of those superhumans who must rely on dictionaries for understanding of the world around you, or are you a moralist who depends on religious beliefs to comprehend the word evil? I don’t know how to reply to your comments since it is obvious that YOU don’t understand the implication behind the word evil.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:27:29 pm
And for your info–a demented person is not necessarily evil. nuff said.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:34:06 pm
uscroger. My pt was either on strictly definitional lines or on strictly religiously moral line this individual was evil. I do understand the implication behind the word evil. Anyone who thinks someone can slaughter 30+ people and not be evil has their head up their ass.
April 19th, 2007 at 6:50:31 pm
Cho would have been infamous even without seeing his videos. He killed over 30 people on a college campus.
April 19th, 2007 at 8:44:26 pm
Venerable Joe - thank you for subbing for me while I was otherwise occupied … (wrt “representats”) … (grin) …
OK … my take(s) …
1) I haven’t seen the Cho video footage - I take peoples’ word that it is majorly disturbing … so - I’d like to think I can trust that the various media did the responsible things, and preceded it with a warning as to content (since they could vet the content beforehand) and scheduled showing it so that, like other potentially disturbing footage, it wouldn’t be showing while littl’uns are being baby-sat by the box … given the comments, however, it seems that I *cannot* trust the various media on this, especially not NBC … pity, that …
2) The comparison with 9/11 doesn’t fly for a host of reasons … NBC could vet the Cho video beforehand whereas the 2 Towers went down LIVE; the footage of the 2 Towers wasn’t the result of direct and deliberate efforts by the various media whereas the Cho video was the direct result of his efforts; sadly, the Cho atrocity isn’t new, and isn’t even much bigger than prior efforts whereas the 2 Towers was an unexpected and then-unpredictable planetary first … with 9/11, how many of us said “Look, a plane flew into the Tower by accident” whereas none of us is likely to be able to say “Cho shot the first two by accident” …
3) At least in NBC’s case, it is part of the MSM - we should be expecting this level of journalistic integrity and responsibility by now … showing Cho’s video is even *more* premeditated by the NBC folk than Imus’s or Mel Gibson’s words were by either of them - can we hope that the NBC folk will be treated at least as severely ?
April 20th, 2007 at 1:07:04 am
YoungPadawan Alasdair, ye’re most Welcome & as always, you representat your incorrect point of View undeservedly Well {backhanded Backpat ;}
Now if only all this 24/7 Coverage of sundry Horrors would Abate sometime or another, I just Might get around to my coldly-premeditated Guestblog about the upcoming Devolved Parliamentary Election in Scotland, which (last I Looked, Lang syne :) it seems the SNP might just possibly Win. (…Yet ere the Sword / Cool in its Sheath / Charlie will come Again… :)
April 20th, 2007 at 9:10:08 am
What’s with Fox usage of the word “Evil.” Are they using the such to refer some relevance to the Bible or is it just another propagandistic tool?
Yes, clearly Fox is unfairly running propoganda against this mass murderer. Geez . . .
Is there a modern definition of the word evil?
Didn’t you just rail against the person who provided you with a dictionary definition (or was that not “modern” enough for you)?
April 20th, 2007 at 9:59:53 am
It’s simple. USCroger doesn’t believe that anything can be good or evil. Everything is just in this wishy washy moral vacuum where nothing deserves praise and nothing deserves condemnation. In his world Mother Theresa can’t be labeled good and Hitler can’t be labeled evil because the every invidious (not “evil” because evil has no meaning) religion has co-opted our pristine society. Although I doubt he believes that pristine has any true meaning either.
April 20th, 2007 at 10:29:50 am
The point isn’t whether or not you can turn off the TV or switch to a different channel. The point is you are giving a platform to a mass murderer and, in doing so, possibly encouraging others to do the same.
What will be your feeling if the next time something like this happens the murderer sends tapes out to every network?
April 20th, 2007 at 10:31:32 am
I think USCRoger is questioning the use of “evil” as a subjective, editorial call. Of course, people are calling Cho crazy, yet my understanding is a psychologist who evaluated him didn’t think he was crazy. I guess it is all in your perspective.
April 20th, 2007 at 12:38:20 pm
Thanks A&A for helping me clarify.
April 20th, 2007 at 2:29:52 pm
“The point is you are giving a platform to a mass murderer and, in doing so, possibly encouraging others to do the same.”
A&A
You fail to realize that this is going to happen again anyway and the same way Cho referenced Columbine the next person will reference him and thats where his “fame” will come from. you, like I did, ran to your tv and was all ready to view the carnage at 6:30pm. Brian Williams did preference the tape by saying that it was graphic. Columbine may have been a reference for Cho but that event did not make him do what he did he was on that path anyway.
I want someone to draw a parallel between VT and Columbine and tell us, “ah hah, thats directly from viewing material from columbine that cho did what he did” I dont think there is
April 20th, 2007 at 3:23:56 pm
He may have been on that path anyway, but I don’t think you can disregard the possibility that viewing these things gives a specific direction to the otherwise scattered anger of a demented mind. He was clearly crazy - Columbine and past shootings didn’t make him so. But who knows if those past events gave the form to the unleashing of his craziness on the public. I don’t think you can say for sure.
As for NBC showing the video, I’m still thinking about that.
April 20th, 2007 at 3:28:03 pm
Nebraska-
I believe there is an angry, alienated loner out there right now who might otherwise just put a gun to his head who will see what is happening with Cho and think, “Hmmm. Why not go out in a blaze of glory?”
As for the connection between Cho and Columbine, I don’t think it is an accident that this happened the same week as the Columbine anniversary.
April 20th, 2007 at 3:33:48 pm
A week of infamy:
April 16 - Virginia Tech Massacre
April 19, 1993 - Waco Fire
April 19, 1995 - Oklahoma City Bombing
April 20, 1999 - Columbine Massacre
April 20th, 2007 at 3:34:30 pm
A&A, I don’t see how covering the shooting for days on end won’t encourage the next loner, but airing Cho’s videos will.
Besides, the Internet and blog community basically assures that a mass-murderer will get his forum. Just host a website, put your message up, and email every blog.
April 20th, 2007 at 3:36:26 pm
Also:
April 20, 1889 - Adolf Hitler is born
April 20, every year - Lot of potheads smoke lots of pot
April 20th, 2007 at 4:08:34 pm
American Revolution started in April (Paul Revere’s ride, April 18-19th 1776).
President Abraham Lincoln’s assassination (April 14, 1865)
Civil War started (April 12, 1861 Confederate attack on Fort Sumter)
The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake (April 18, 1906)
The sinking of the RMS Titanic (April 14-15 April 1912)
And if we look beyond the one week span from the 14-20th we also get:
Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination (April 4, 1968)
Chernobyl nuclear accident (April 26, 1986)
The 1992 Los Angeles Riots after the Rodney King verdict (April 29, 1992)
Face it, April sucks!
April 20th, 2007 at 5:13:48 pm
The difference between the blogosphere and journalism is editorial judgement.
Someone tell Nancy Grace.
April 21st, 2007 at 10:29:51 am
Both FDR and Lincoln died in April.