The Media and Mass Shootings
I can remember watching sports on
television in years past, and every so often an overzealous (and maybe
intoxicated) fan would run onto the field. The crowd would cheer, and the
network cameras would follow the fan around until he inevitably got clobbered
by security officers. Admittedly it was fun to watch. Who would turn away,
right?
As time went by, there were more and
more fans running onto ballfields. Eventually the networks realized they were
feeding the problem. The fans were seeking attention, and the networks were
obliging them by televising their one moment of glory. These days, the networks
turn the cameras away when a fan runs onto the ballfield. And not surprisingly,
there are far fewer crazy fans running onto fields these days.
We have had a series of mass shootings
in our country beginning with Columbine in 1999, and continuing with Virginia
Tech in 2007. But we have now had three new attacks in just under two years
(Tucson, Aurora, and now Newtown). The trend is not good. And what common
factors can we see in all of these events? These attacks were all premeditated
and well-planned. And all of them occurred in the age of around-the-clock cable
news coverage.
Clearly, there were mental health issues
involved in all of these cases. I am no psychologist, but it seems pretty clear
that these mass killers want a grand spectacle, some sort of sick notoriety
from their acts. They want to be famous, and it turns out the American media is
happy to oblige them. As with the fans running onto sports fields, the American
media are providing a platform for mentally ill killers to sensationalize their
crimes.
The media’s coverage of the Newtown
massacre was an absolute circus. In the first hours after the shooting, major
media outlets got many of the basic facts wrong. It was reported that the
killer had a child in the school. It was reported that the killer’s mother
worked at the school. It was reported that there was a second shooter. The
media reported at one point that the killer was 24-year-old Ryan Lanza and
posted his photo on television and the internet. All of this reporting was
wrong. Horribly wrong.
Yet despite being quite incompetent at
their jobs, the media (particularly cable media) were enthusiastic about
quickly pointing a finger at those who were supposedly responsible for this
atrocity: the school should have had better security, our country should have
better gun laws, etc., etc.
It is time that the American media stop
and take a look in the mirror, and understand that it is part of the problem. A
big part of the problem. Why is it that we have had three mass shootings in
less than two years? In part, it is because these mentally disturbed killers
know the media will fulfill their twisted desire for fame and notoriety.
I am not suggesting that there be no
coverage of such events in the future. Hopefully there will be no more of these
events. But if there is another tragedy, the media should treat it as such. And
I would specifically recommend that the media not publish the name or photo of
the assailant. The media should deprive the killer of his notoriety and simply
refer to him as “a 20-year-old male assailant,” as was the case in the Newtown
attack.
I am guessing the media would object to
this limitation, but it is already voluntarily showing restraint in other areas.
Recently, many press outlets have decided against publishing the names of the
victims of sexual crimes. Presumably this step was taken to protect the privacy
and dignity of the victim. If the privacy of a single victim is sufficient
reason to withhold information from the public, wouldn’t the prevention of
future mass shootings be an even better reason?
It is unlikely in this age of social
media that the identity of a mass murderer could remain completely unknown, but
the mainstream American media could easily adopt an industry standard that a
mass killer’s name or likeness not be broadcast.
Other steps should be taken as well.
Facts should be verified before they are reported. There should be no
commentary, and especially no political commentary, for a long period afterward.
And the entire event should be treated with dignity toward the victims and
their families, and not as a media event. Public officials should utilize
written press releases, and memorial services of any kind should be private.
These horrific events should be covered
in a sober and objective manner, not sensational or political. The American
media have it exactly backward, and it needs to change before more innocent
people get hurt.
