PDA

View Full Version : WasMSNBC overboard



S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 06:43 AM
in airing the tapes from the killer at VT? I think so...And I especially liked the comment from MSNBC saying that they aired the tapes with compassion and understanding for those who were wounded and the families of those who were killed. Yup.. nice touch.. Lots of compassion and understanding...

Garrett Lowell
04-20-2007, 06:47 AM
I disagree. It's best that these things are aired and not hidden.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 06:53 AM
Garrett.. why...? I think it puts a lot of stress on the survivors, a lot of stress on the families whose kids were killed. It really has no point except to sensationalize something horrendous. Oh.. and to boost ratings of course.
There is something about putting out the news, there is something else about tuning into the morbid curiousity of the masses.

Tom Montgomery
04-20-2007, 06:56 AM
The story could have been covered without airing the video and photos. I don't believe NBC's explanation of their decision for one moment. If TV news has pictures, they're gonna air them. Period.

Phillip Allen
04-20-2007, 06:57 AM
I haven't given this much thought but my automatic thinking leans toward NO SECRETS.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 07:01 AM
Umm, I wonder whether they have caught that guy in CA. yet who went out saying he was gonna make what happened at VT. look like kids play.
Sure, there should be no secrets.. but at the same time, was a video nec? I don't think so... that is too graphic and unnecessary.

ishmael
04-20-2007, 07:08 AM
Only caught a snippet, but in general I'm with Tom. From what I can gather a part of what these ill young men are up to is attention seeking, and playing their manifestos on the toob feeds that.

We had a copycat threat of a bomb here at the University of Maine, one of many across the country. The media coverage carries some of the blame. Not to censor it, but some self control, where the story is reported but not glorified, would be in order. Playing the ill ramblings of an unbalanced young man isn't necessary to get the story across.

geeman
04-20-2007, 07:23 AM
It was very graphic and sobering.But if you look at it from another perspective,possibly it can actually help people in the future.Maybe people will see a threat more clearly.If NBC showed it only for sensationalism ,then it was in poor taste.

ccmanuals
04-20-2007, 07:32 AM
I would have to agree with Tom that this story could have been covered without airing the video and photos. Other than shock what is the real value added to this story by showing them? The media did not do anything illegal but I think they may have crossed the line of common sense in return for ratings on this one.

Garrett Lowell
04-20-2007, 07:38 AM
Garrett.. why...? I think it puts a lot of stress on the survivors, a lot of stress on the families whose kids were killed.

I doubt it could add much more to the woes of the stricken families. Open societies are open societies and this comes with a burden. Consider that this may actually help the families to go through the grieving process quicker and only once rather than have to grieve many times.

You ask me "why", as if we are all compelled to have the TV on, to have the news thrust on us, as if we MUST watch this killer. I have not seen the video and this is my choice. I would much rather have the choice to make than to not have any choice at all. Perhaps you should consider this and realize that maybe you have forgotten how to choose.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 07:41 AM
Garrett.. I did choose. I turned it off.

S/V Laura Ellen
04-20-2007, 07:49 AM
So the question is:
What was different this time?

The answer:
Nothing, regular news stops happening during these media fests. The 24 hr new/entertainment services (advertising laws in Canada would require the change to entertainment/news as the highest content must be first) are no longer able to just report the news they have to make it in order to fill 24 hours of programming.

Garrett Lowell
04-20-2007, 08:22 AM
Garrett.. I did choose. I turned it off.

Sorry, I didn't mean to proselytize.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 08:24 AM
no problem..Garrett...

I guess I have figured this out..
Jerry Springer has taken over MSNBC.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 08:43 AM
that don't add to the clarity or understanding

Bingo.. they don't.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 08:50 AM
you are confusing different forms of the media here.. Looking a t apicture is a lot different than a video with sound... At least to me.
Seeing a guy sit there and spew venom about everyone, pointing a gun at you is a lot different than something you only see in print. Not one sense is involved but several.
I see no comparison between your example and the video.

ishmael
04-20-2007, 08:52 AM
You are ignorant of human psychology, Norm.

The mass coverage over the last few days is fueling the same psychopathology in similar young men. I'm not calling for censorship, far from it, but you can tell the story without pumping more adrenalin into the mad young men. For every Cho who acts on his delusions, there are ten. We shouldn't, because it's valuable to the sponsors, be in the business of encouraging them.

stevebaby
04-20-2007, 08:53 AM
News organisations show this sort of stuff because it's popular. It rates.
If people didn't want to see it, they wouldn't show it.

brad9798
04-20-2007, 08:55 AM
We had 2-3 killing threats this week locally ... at high schools ... in fact they arrested a couple of punks that had just stolen 12 firearms from a private collection.

Hello copycats and losers ...

F them all.

brad9798
04-20-2007, 08:56 AM
Norman- check the news ... it does inspire!

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 08:59 AM
Norman.. sure they can get it from TV.. from videos.. but the VT incident was real. Even they see the difference between TV and reality when it comes to something like this. They see a real guy getting his three days of fame.. not fifteen minues as someone wrote...They think hell, why not...
Why do you think the accused murderer sent his crap to MSNBC? Simple.. He knew it would be shown world wide. Millions of people would be looking at him.. He would be the center of attraction.
And I still don't see why the video had to be shown. It really was in poor taste. And I think, in some instances, it is going to have the reverse effect.. All of those out there.. this could just be a trigger to copycat.
Actually, if you look at the shut downs, the bomb scares, crazies on the loose wanting to prove they can kill more people than at VT, over the past two days, I think this is obvious.

ishmael
04-20-2007, 09:01 AM
As I said, Norm. You are ignorant of human psychology.

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 09:02 AM
I doubt it could add much more to the woes of the stricken families. Open societies are open societies and this comes with a burden. Consider that this may actually help the families to go through the grieving process quicker and only once rather than have to grieve many times.

You ask me "why", as if we are all compelled to have the TV on, to have the news thrust on us, as if we MUST watch this killer. I have not seen the video and this is my choice. I would much rather have the choice to make than to not have any choice at all. Perhaps you should consider this and realize that maybe you have forgotten how to choose.

Well, the victims' families disagree with you. A number of them had agreed to do interviews with msnbc the next day. When the tapes were aired they cancelled and said they were apalled with the release of the videos.

Many Virginia Tech students have voiced on the message boards that they need the media to get out of their face and let them heal. Many of us alumni have been emailing the networks asking them to do that. It won't do any good, but we have to do what little we can to help them. The public relations director very politely told the media it was time for them to go home. In time they will listen.

Bobby

JimD
04-20-2007, 09:07 AM
...There is something about putting out the news, there is something else about tuning into the morbid curiousity of the masses.

If there was ever a difference there no longer is. The two fused into one a long time ago.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 09:12 AM
Norman.. as you and I are bystanders here.. Let me ask you a question.
How would you react if it was your daughter killed and you had to look at the face of the killer for three days straight...? Would you sit there and say.. ah, it's the news.. All good.. Important to put everything out there for the world to see. It doesn't matter to me.. It's the right thing to do... I don't care.. The masses have to know every detail even if it hurts me.
I think, and I am speaking for myself, if this was my circumstance, the last thing I would want to see on the screen is the killer's tapes and videos

ishmael
04-20-2007, 09:15 AM
Norm,

Is it possible, in your universe, that both are true?

I've been hooked with the mental health community for twenty years, in various ways. My takes on this mad cat aren't loosely considered. That doesn't mean I have an answer. I'm still very much asking questions. But one thing I have learned is that this psychology demands attention, and my thought is that the community giving them attention isn't a good thing. It makes them more mad.

I don't know about this kid, and I don't have an advanced degree in psychology, so throw some salt over your shoulder.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 09:40 AM
Soo.. Norman.. you say such occurrances were rare thirty years ago.. they were.. And the TX incident you mentioned is the first that I remember as well.
So, if they were rare back in the 60's and early 70's, why are there more now? Is it because of the media attention? If there has been an increase in incidents and media attrention.. seems to connect... More media attention, more incidents.
And as I wrote, as did several others, in the past three days, there have been threats on campus, individuals who have stated to the police or whomever is listening, that they will make the VT incident look like a milk run.
By saying in your post that these incidents were rare and the coverage was not as good back in 1966 you are correct.. But now, we have more coverage..ipso.. more incidents.

psss.. The most recent nut case actually mentioned the kids responsible for the Columbine killings by name....

ishmael
04-20-2007, 09:43 AM
"The fact that prior to Whitman, there were relatively few situations like this, was probably more due to the fact that semi-automatic weapons with high capacity clips were far less generally available."

Bull****. Whitman was a nutcase because he had a brain tumor, not because of any gun's capacity. Did fifteen round clips contribute to Cho's efficiancy? Sure. But the underlying illness is what needs adressing, not how many rounds you can put in a clip.

I go back to me taking a rifle, fully functional, on the bus. No one thought twice. It was the farthest thing from any mentor, any adult, that this kid would use this rifle to shoot people. What has changed? Something we should look at has changed.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 09:48 AM
Norman.. I posted a question.. a few actually. Luckily and sincerely it was hypothetical but you failed to anser them. Bottom line, if your daughter was in the list of students killed, would you want all of this media attention put out on the student responsible? Etc.. etc..

hansp77
04-20-2007, 10:01 AM
I have been checking out the youtube contributions to this area.

Of course they are re-showing the TV broadcasts, and of course also there is a bunch of young people theorizing and philosophising about it. Some of interest. Some pretty damn wacky.

this guy is a bit of both.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0smFC_0Bn4&mode=related&search=

aside from the routine showponying on there, events like this make me apreciate what a interesting thing Youtube can be.

geeman
04-20-2007, 10:25 AM
We're missing something here.Last night on our local affiliate,they aired a piece on our local paper.It seems our county mayor was charged recently with bear hunting out of season.A reporter with the local paper printed it.The mayor (so they say) called the paper DEMANDING he be fired.The paper did fire him.
Now since its true the mayor was charged,was the paper guilty of censorship? I think so,if they went along with the mayors demands.
News is news,sometimes it hurts people,but its still news.
Who wants to open the paper , or turn on the news and know that what they saw or read was 1st censored?
News is sometimes good, sometimes bad.But I want the truth.
Do I know that the news is censored sometimes, yes I do,but I dont like it.
Sometimes news is hard to take,for those involved.But we still need to know what transpired.
There may be some good that comes out of the truth.In any event, knowing FACTS is always a good thing.
Answering Jamies question.Of course NO ONE here would want their family to go thru that situation,to be put in that position,I know I wouldnt.And I'd be damn mad if it happened.BUT it is news,the country has a right to know.Its tough, but there it is.

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 10:30 AM
It seems that we very often get mired in lengthy debates about circumstances and situations which are actually extraordinarily rare in American society... and deranged lunatic killers are just such an event. There have been only 8 events like this in the last 30 years... and the earliest events occurred LONG before the media was pervasive enough to 'inspire' anyone, let alone brave enough to actually post the sorts of photographs and videos we're seeing from this event.

The earliest, in my recollection, was Charles Whitman, who took his arsenal up the tower in austin TX in 1966 and spent 80 minutes sniping and killing before he was finally brought down by police.

The fact that prior to Whitman, there were relatively few situations like this, was probably more due to the fact that semi-automatic weapons with high capacity clips were far less generally available.... those intent on mass murder were incapable of killing very many people before they were stopped.

All I'm suggesting is this: the blame placed on the popular media, as well as violence in movies, TV shows, electronic games, and so forth, is probably misplaced. I believe the simple fact of the matter is that. just like being struck by lightning, psychotic sociopaths who decide to arm themselves and kill everyone they see are extraordinarily rare occurences, for which there are no possible preventative measures. It has happened in the past, and will happen again, and we are powerless to stop it... but grateful that it is indeed a rare occurence. I don't see any evidence that these events are a catalyst for other psychotic individuals to act... although I'd admit that the method by which they commit mayhem is probably influenced.

I don't in any way blame the media for what happened here. The blame falls on one disturbed young man who for whatever reason didn't get the help he needed.

What I do blame the media for is the witch hunt mentalilty that makes them look for a living person to take the fall for this. They have tried to blame the University, and can't understand when we stand behind the administration. They have tried to turn the students against the Administration, and can't understand when President Steger gets a standing ovation from the students at the convocation. They have attacked the University for not getting Cho committed (or something), and can't understand when they were told that everything within the law was done, and he was evaluated and not felt to be a risk. They have asked the students if they now felt unsafe and would transfer, and can't understand when the overwhelming response is "You have got to be kidding." They don't understand when 20,000 students start chanting "Lets go Hokies." at the end of the candlelight vigil on the drillfield. They ask the Korean students if they now feel unsafe or unwanted, and can't understand when the Student Government writes a letter to the Korean government full of love and compassion.

They can't possibly understand what it means to be a Hokie... and they need to go home and let the students heal.

Bobby

ccmanuals
04-20-2007, 10:36 AM
I really believe this is turning out to be an indictment of the media and deservedly so. In order to obtain ratings and because the notion from the media analysts is "this is what the people want to see" we are getting crummy reporting and virtually no investigative reporting at all. The legitimate news organizations, i.e. CBS, NBC etc. are sinking to the Jerry Springer level of programming. I believe these organizations have a responsibility to report the news in an adult, clear, concise and non-biased manner and not just air the best sound bite of the day. Just because it's on youtube doesn't mean it's what I want to see when I sit down in the evening to watch world news. just my .02.

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 10:51 AM
Norman.. I think the Gov. has set up a comission to look into this. A report due within 30 or 60 days. I have no trouble with that and think it is a good iddea.
On another bent regarding the media. I listened.. please note, did not watch an interview with a roommate of the accused murderer.. please note accused.
The interviewer would ask a question.. the student would anser it.. Well, I sensed that the answer is not what the interviewer wanted.. So.. question, worded differently.. over an over again.. As if the interviewer was attempting to put ideas in the student's head..
I mean.. this is a form of baiting... The student sticks to his accounts and yet the media keeps harping and harping until there is something they want to hear.
I just sat there and listened and said to myself.. Hey stupid, the guy answered the question.. Give it a rest..
Knowing that what the student said was not news or really very interesting. But the media wants sensationalism. It sells. And on TV., it sells big time.

Robmill0605
04-20-2007, 11:11 AM
I think it was a HUGE mistake to air this. These families have not even been able to get these dead kids out of the morque yet, and NBC does this?
Funny how they wanted to take the moral high ground with Imus because of " sensitivity " to the basketball girls, but air this?
I hope the backlash willl be fierce...

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 11:17 AM
I'm sorry, I'm going to have to disagree with your characterization of the media's role here.

You're making some very specific accusations against the media, for which I see no real evidence. You say, "They have tried to blame the University, and can't understand when we stand behind the administration." The Media didn't make accusation.... they raised questions about whether the University had been responsible in handling the issue.... it's up to the viewers to judge the responses and decide. You say, "They have tried to turn the students against the Administration...", and I find that an inflammatory.... and even absurd... allegation. You say, "They have attacked the University for not getting Cho committed (or something), and can't understand when they were told that everything within the law was done, and he was evaluated and not felt to be a risk. " when, in fact, they reported the events... it was no attack, it was just a damn news report.

In short, you're suggesting that the basic fact that they REPORTED on this event is somehow an 'attack'.... and you offer no evidence to support such an allegation.

If you're saying that there was too much media attention, and that the University shouldn't be subjected to such an intense media spotlight... then I sympathize... but can't fully agree. Sure, the reporting of a major news event is intrinsically invasive, and it's very easy to understand why the community affected would be resentful....

... but try to imagine the scenario if the event were NOT reported.

We are going to just have to disagree. I understand that I don't have an unbiased view, and thats OK. The accusations I have made are based on my perception of the reporting as it happened.

Initially, they were asking how the second shooting occurred, why wasn't the campus "locked down", what were the bumble-head police doing? When the law enforcement community in general supported the actions, the media backed off that. But they still stuck a camera in the students face and asked how they could support the administration. This is not reporting, this is newsmaking.

The University asked (strongly) that the Governor set up a commission to review the response and learn from it. The Governor stated this very clearly when he announced it. The media in general spun this as the Governor now wants the inquisition and is backing off his support. He had to reiterate that this wasn't true several times. This is not reporting, it is newsmaking.

At one press conference, a police representative (chief I think) read the list of victims names. By the end he was overcome with emotion, said he couldn't take questions, and left the room. The press reported that he acted in an arrogant manner by leaving. This is no way to treat someone who has spent time at that crime scene trying to figure out what happened.

I could go on with more issues, not made up, but from various interviews of students, prospective students, alumni, etc. I have seen many of these interviews, maybe you haven't. Some I have been referred to through the various Virginia Tech message boards I visit, so those may not have been on when you watched.

I don't have any issue with reporting. But the media, in my perception, is trying to create a divisive situation to have dirt to report. This is not a new belief for me based on my remote involvement in this situation, but my view based on many years of watching news reporting. Even local reports are twisted, I was interviewed once by the local paper, and the quote didn't resemble what I said. They couldn't have even chopped words from my quote to get what was printed. I have very little faith in the media in general. That is an unfair characterization I know, but every time I think that I see something else that cements it harder.

I'm sure I won't convince you I'm right. Thats OK, doesn't mean anything is wrong with either of us, just that we have different perspectives.

Bobby
Let's go Hokies!

S.V. Airlie
04-20-2007, 11:21 AM
Norman.. it was not just one interview.. It was several... And it is a matter of opinion whether they were badly conducted.. If one was looking for something to bite on.something they can take to the market the interviews were great. If one realized the interviewer was just looking for something for the masses to bite on, they were great.

And no, I did not listen to Gonzo.. I figured that there was no reason to.. Just listen to the idiots afterwards... That case is closed.. Guilty... courtesy of the media. Not that Gonzo has any relevance here but I was sure someone would bring him up.
Again.. interviewwers interviewing members.. Answer from some.. " look.. I did not say that..blah blah blah.." Interviewer but.. umm.. well, asking the same question..blah blah blah.. Response again.. " I did not say that! Don't put words in my mouth..blah blah blah."

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 11:23 AM
I'm sorry you saw a badly conducted interview.... it does happen, not all reporters are competent or fair, and that's just life. Neither are Attorney Generals, if you bothered to watch the coverage at all.... we would all like every person to be totally competent at their job, but that's not reality.

For the record, I watched a great deal of the coverage, and didn't see anything like that... but even if I had, I'd hardly come down on the entire media for it.

Indicting the entire media, regardless of the situation or event, is always a cheap shot, an excuse, a disingenuous dodge.

The problem is that there are enough reporters, anchors, etc that cross the line that the industry gets tarred with their brush. Its not fair, but the number isn't 5% by any means on the major networks. Fox comes off high and mighty about how they aren't going to use the video, then show it that night. For every good reporter or show, there is another on the same network that is trash, IMOH.

Bobby

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 11:41 AM
I don't have any problem with agreeing to disagree, Hokiefan.... I think that's what the bilge is actually for!

Interestingly, the business about local reporters getting it wrong is something I can identify with. My wife has a fairly high profile 'psuedo-public' position in the town I live in, and the local reporters for the local paper nearly always get it wrong when she's quoted in an article. To be fair, people who report for a circulation 20,000 newpaper aren't exactly Pulitzer prize winners.

However, you did say something which I believe deserves reflection. you said,



To which, all I can say is, if you acknowledge that the characterization is unfair, then why do you persist with it?

Bear in mind that the press was resoundly criticized for publishing the photos of prisoner abuse at Abu Gahraib, with accusations that they were pandering to the sensational, and were besmirching the good name of the military. Yet, the photos weren't fraudulent, and we know those events happened. Did the press, by publishing those photos, indict EVERY member of the Armed Forces? Was the press guilty of damaging the reputation of every soldier.... or just those who participated? And most importantly, are those who criticized the coverage of that incident right, that the photos shouldn't have been published, even though they were both truthful and important?

The characterization is unfair to those that are good, honest, and accurate. Unfortunately, in my opinion, that is significantly less than half of the national news media. To them I apologize.

And no, I'm not going to list examples to generate my statistics. The opinion is several years old, so I haven't in general watched the national news since coming to that conclusion. Also note, that I include in the national news media all of the "news" shows on all the networks, not just the major evening news shows.

Bobby

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 11:54 AM
Then where do you get your news?

I read. Newspapers, magazines, books, internet articles. If need be I dig a little bit. Filter the best I know how, then try to form my own opinion. Easier said than done, I admit.

You know, just like the advice you get here on WBF. Read, consider the source, understand, filter, combine, examine, apply what fits...

Cheers,

Bobby

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 12:04 PM
Sounds like you're only excluding television, right?

In general, yes. The printed media has their issues as well, but they don't really have the sound bite problem that TV has. Although you have to watch for that in the internet articles immediately after the fact.

We don't generally watch a lot of TV anyway, thats by choice. The kids are the only deprived ones they know without cable. :D But there are so many worthwhile things to do besides watch TV. The only thing I really miss is ESPN for college football and I wish we had Fox Sports so my son could watch more professional soccer. He's a pretty good player and is old enough to benefit from being a student of the game.

Cheers,

Bobby

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-20-2007, 12:27 PM
Agreed it's hurtful to the families of the murdered children but, it is probably helpful to the total audience to see and take the measure of a mass murderer.
There were plenty of indications that the killer had problems but no one was able to drive the point home. Maybe if more people had been knowledgeable about what a severely troubled individual looks like they might have raised more questions about this guy's obviuos problems and got the school to force his withdrawal.
The murderer shared a dorm room with, at least, two other men. Their description of Cho didn't go much beyond " he was peculiar" and "he was very unfriendly". I'll bet they will be much more inclined to make carefull judgements of every new face they meet during the remainder of their lives.

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 12:35 PM
Agreed it's hurtful to the families of the murdered children but, it is probably helpful to the total audience to see and take the measure of a mass murderer.
There were plenty of indications that the killer had problems but no one was able to drive the point home. Maybe if more people had been knowledgeable about what a severely troubled individual looks like they might have raised more questions about this guy's obviuos problems and got the school to force his withdrawal.
The murderer shared a dorm room with two other men. Their description of Cho didn't go much beyond " he was peculiar" and "he was very unfriendly". I'll bet they will be much more inclined to make carefull judgements of every new face they meet during the remainder of their lives.

I've met a lot of people that fit in the "he was peculiar" and "he was very unfriendly" catagory. Probably not to this extent, but the world is full of strange and unusual people. Do we want to paint them all with this brush? I can't personally.

My father always used to say "We are all weird in our own way. Some of them are just a little weirder than the rest of us." I couldn't have spent much time around this guy, but that's because I like to be with upbeat, positive people. Makes my outlook on the world a lot brighter and easier to work with.

Bobby

edited for spelling

hokiefan
04-20-2007, 12:49 PM
I just wanted to express my thanks to all of you for letting me say my piece on this forum. It helps.

It has been truly remarkable the response from students and alumni of all the schools throughout this country and abroad. Candlelight vigils have been held all over the country. People are collecting money to help those effected directly. I've seen some incredibly insightfull articles and letters, some of the best written by sportswriters, believe it or not. People from all over are visiting the sports message boards, the largest gathering place, and posting condolences, links to pictures of the vigils, articles, etc. Some posted poems. The most touching (to me) were from the heated rivals, UVa, WVU, UM. There were other, Texas A&M's muster broke me into tears.

Many normal posters on the board have said that they will never be able to boo the "hated rival" again, after the love and support they have shown. I think the mingling at the tailgates this year will take on a whole new meaning. To see Hoo's wearing Orange and Maroon, well you don't see that often. When the world responds with love to despicable actions, maybe some good will come out in the end. One can hope.

Bobby

Concordia...41
04-20-2007, 01:05 PM
Sorry, I haven't had time to read the whole thread, but one of the comments made by a VT student when asked about the broadcast of the materials sent to NBC said to effect, 'this isn't about Cho, it's about ______" and then she proceeded to name friends that were killed.

It just struck me that the ones lost should be the subject of the news items.

I know our (human nature's) morbid fascination seems to somehow be drawn to a story on where Cho went to high school and his prior history, but I believe ignoring the gunman and focusing on the victims would serve as a deterrent to the sickos that think infamy is the ticket to going down in history.

SamSam
04-20-2007, 05:11 PM
Yes, he did. I am not arguing that psychotic sociopaths don't emulate other psychotic sociopaths... only that the correlation just isn't there. McVeigh didn't mention any previous mass murderers after Oklahoma, did he? Once again, causation/causality.
.

I think McVeigh mentioned Waco and Ruby Ridge and those were a direct cause of what he did. He did what he did on the anniversary of Waco, I believe. He considered the FBI and ATF to be mass murderers, or maybe masses of murderers, or both.

SamSam
04-20-2007, 06:04 PM
[quote=ishmael;1554948 What has changed? Something we should look at has changed.[/quote]

I think Vietnam changed a bunch of things. People hauled off the streets and sent to a very foreign country and put in a situation of abundant drugs, a hopeless situation with no solution, kill or be killed. In the end it all turned out to be pointless. There was no plan to win, there was no valid reason to even go there. Respect for authority was lost, as authority was shown to be quite capable of being wrong and used for almost personal reasons. Instead of reasonable rules formulated by a consensus of wise men, it was exposed as a system manipulated by powerfull men with enormous egos in pissing contests with others of the same persuasion, all the way from local to international politics. Vietnam fractured American society, Iraq is doing the same to the world.

Garrett Lowell
04-22-2007, 07:45 AM
Well, the victims' families disagree with you. A number of them had agreed to do interviews with msnbc the next day. When the tapes were aired they cancelled and said they were apalled with the release of the videos.

Many Virginia Tech students have voiced on the message boards that they need the media to get out of their face and let them heal. Many of us alumni have been emailing the networks asking them to do that. It won't do any good, but we have to do what little we can to help them. The public relations director very politely told the media it was time for them to go home. In time they will listen.

Bobby

My wife and many of our friends are VT Alumni. I've spent many a Saturday at the Hokie House getting ready to go to a football game (and of course not making it to the game at all). My wife has spent alot of time at Norris Hall. We read about VT to our kids ("Hello, Hokie Bird!").

I'm sorry for the families. I feel the tapes should have been played, and that they were played at the best time. Better to get it all over with now than to drag it out for years (remember the 9/11 tapes?). Again, that's only my opinion.

geeman
04-22-2007, 09:20 AM
I think they needed to be played, but it was very much over done.Play it a fews times and then drop it.The public DID NEED to see it, just not as much as it was and is STILL be pushed down the public AND the victims families throats.

Gary E
04-22-2007, 09:31 AM
Umm, I wonder whether they have caught that guy in CA. yet who went out saying he was gonna make what happened at VT. look like kids play.
Sure, there should be no secrets.. but at the same time, was a video nec? I don't think so... that is too graphic and unnecessary.

No one forced you to watch

There is another button on your TV

the one labeld ...OFF

S.V. Airlie
04-22-2007, 09:36 AM
Gary I hit that button.. I am not a member of the morbid masses.
I watched it for three minutes max.. that was enough

Gary E
04-22-2007, 09:40 AM
Maybe I didnt see the intire thing that was shown on MSNBC
but what NBC showed was ok by me

Maybe if more REAL LIFE was shown on TV there would be less crime..
Show REAL life... and DEATH... maybe the fact that when your shot dead, you dont get to come back for a do over in tomarrows episode.

Show some pic's of REAL car Crasshes and the pain and suffering...etc

Ahh but Americans are WHIMPS.... they want EVERYTHING toned down to portray only the good life...

They want the WAR on TV... not in MY Back Yard ... etc etc

Is American Idol on?... why not?? Common THAT's what the public really wants

geeman
04-22-2007, 10:08 AM
Slightly off topic but,,,,,,,,
I think when teens are ready to start driving,it ought to be required that they visit a morgue.They should be required to witness an autopsy.They should be required to go to a wrecking yard with instructors so it can be explained in graphic detail what happens to a human body in a violent crash.
Too graphic for you?
As part of their training it should be made obvious to them what happens when they start showing off and dont drive properly.
It should be stressed that when they take to the road that they have their own lives in their hands, as well as OTHERS PEOPLES lives as well.
Too graphic you think?, I dont

S.V. Airlie
04-22-2007, 10:09 AM
No.. one step too far geeman.. An Emergency room on a Fri. or Sat. night.

geeman
04-22-2007, 10:11 AM
Agreed Jamie.
We cannot expect our kids to make informed decisions when we try to insulate them from life , and what their own decisions can have on it.

S.V. Airlie
04-22-2007, 10:25 AM
Been there.. emergency room(s) at 2am on a Fri.. as an EMT.
Even yesterday at the EBS, I had two beers and five diet cokes. No way was I gonna drive home after drinking umm.. what I could have drunk... A three hour drive to start...

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-22-2007, 10:27 AM
Ahh but Americans are WHIMPS.... they want EVERYTHING toned down to portray only the good life...



Wrong wrong, wrong.
You, obviously, haven't been watching much broadcast TV lately. Gore sells. Cadavers, autopsies, victims spurting blood, are on the tube every night.
Back before this current spate of gore there was a video tape available that was nothing but the aftermath of fatal vehicle accidents. Victims screaming as they were pried from their smasheshed vehicles, moans and convulsions of the dying. It was a very hot item among certain youthful demographic groups or those whose psychological age had remained at that level.
What I draw from what I see is that a lot of Americans are TASTELESS. and JUVENILE.

"Notice I didn't even get into the slasher and chainsaw movies?"

Gary E
04-22-2007, 10:41 AM
I musta missed that stuff Chuck...but I still think there's whimps,
they want it on TV where Do Overs are tbe norm.. not in THEIR live's ...

Bob Adams
04-22-2007, 10:46 AM
Back to the topic, I consider the media to have a measure of responsibility in these events. Say you want to commit suicide, but want to leave your mark on the world. Shoot up a school! You are assured of getting the fame you desire. For example, The Baltimore Democrat, er, I mean The Baltimore Sun, had a 6 x 5 color picture of the lunitic on the front page. If it bleeds, it leads. Shameful.