Thank you, Mass Media

[Wacka]

I can sum up the reasons he did it in three simple words:

 

 

HE WAS NUTS.

[SilverNRed]

The media giving themselves credit for pulling the tape from the air is equivalent to giving cho credit for stopping at 32.

It's actually worse than that. They only stopped because they realized the vast majority of their audience really hated the decision. And, more importantly, they stopped because the grieving families were cancelling interviews because of it. In other words, they stopped because this was going to start hurting their bottom line. They didn't have an epiphany that what they were doing was horribly misguided.

 

But, to hear them explain it, making these decisions was really "tough" on them. They've done the right thing all along and have only acted with all necessary concern for the "victims and heroes." And it's really important to recognize how brave our journalists are both for showing this crap in the first place and for (partially) pulling it off the air the next day. Journalists....the real heroes.

[IDBillzFan]

There's no truth to be had by airing his nonsense and certainly no value in doing so...

In all fairness, it does give Rosie O'Donnell someone new to sympathize with and keep her from yet again suggesting that 7 WTC was a government conspiracy job because fire can't melt steel.

 

And what's good for Rosie is good for all of us.

 

Hillary/Rosie '08!!!!

[The Dean]

In all fairness, it does give Rosie O'Donnell someone new to sympathize with and keep her from yet again suggesting that 7 WTC was a government conspiracy job because fire can't melt steel.

 

And what's good for Rosie is good for all of us.

 

Hillary/Rosie '08!!!!

 

...vs Rudy/Rush?

 

Might as well make it a total crapfest! (Although, at leas Hillary has been effective.)

[Booster4324]

The people who do these sort of things are lonely and needy. They crave attention and power. For whatever reason, they feel helpless to change their own lives, much less effect society which they all seem to crave. They have had a poor home life/chemical imbalance/picked on/blah blah blah. It's always someone elses fault and they are determined to prove it.

 

I actually pointed this out after Columbine to a few friends of mine and they said I was being ridiculous. The media are catering to our own inner demons. It's akin to the people who feel the need to rubberneck at the site of a car crash. At the same time the media is catering to these poor, deluded sick men.

 

If GTA, violent action films, and gun rights must accept some culpability for the actions of these madmen then so must the media which gives them their immortality and allows them to spread their message. In fact I would say the lion's share of the blame should fall on them. If they were completely ignored it's unlikely they would be so relatively common nowadays.

 

Thats my take anyway.

[IDBillzFan]

(Although, at leas Hillary has been effective.)

She really has. She has her pulse on America and truly understands what it takes to advance us as a country in the global effort for peace and unity.

 

 

Okay. Sorry. I tried. No matter how you say it, it still sounds like crap. Hillary wants to do one thing and one thing only: embarrass her husband. It's what she lives for. And she'll take her sweet everlovin' time doing it.

[The Dean]

She really has. She has her pulse on America and truly understands what it takes to advance us as a country in the global effort for peace and unity.

 

 

Okay. Sorry. I tried. No matter how you say it, it still sounds like crap. Hillary wants to do one thing and one thing only: embarrass her husband. It's what she lives for. And she'll take her sweet everlovin' time doing it.

 

 

Her support of the Iraq war is simply a planned effort to dis Bill?

 

Brilliant!

 

IMO, the 3-way she had with Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson was more effective.

[Kelly the Dog]

First of all, NBC asked the police immediately if they could release it before they did, and the police said go ahead, just be reasonable with it. And they didnt show all of it. That is arguable whether they have been reasonable. I think not. But they weren't irresponsible in just showing it.

 

Sure I think they go overboard. Sure I think that they shouldn't say over and over this is the worst shooting in history. But I definitely think they should show the video. And frankly, I don't really see how this could make it much worse for a victim's family. It's already as bad as it gets. Not being directly affected, I guess I wouldn't know.

 

My idea would be that in situations like this, the media organizations say we're going to show this X (few) number of times, and then make it available on their websites, where you have to register (free) to watch it. That way, anyone that wants to can see it, but it's a little pain in the ass.

[SilverNRed]

Sure I think they go overboard. Sure I think that they shouldn't say over and over this is the worst shooting in history. But I definitely think they should show the video.

Why? It benefits absolutely no one. If anything, it's inspiration for the next guy.

 

And frankly, I don't really see how this could make it much worse for a victim's family. It's already as bad as it gets. Not being directly affected, I guess I wouldn't know.

It must have had some effect on the families of the victims if they were cancelling appearances on the Today Show today in response. And, honestly, if they made life harder for just one of the victim's families this week because they wanted to jack up their ratings, then it was the wrong thing to do.

 

Hope the extra blood money in the bank account was worth it.

[Kelly the Dog]

Why? It benefits absolutely no one. If anything, it's inspiration for the next guy.

 

It must have had some effect on the families of the victims if they were cancelling appearances on the Today Show today in response. And, honestly, if they made life harder for just one of the victim's families this week because they wanted to jack up their ratings, then it was the wrong thing to do.

 

Hope the extra blood money in the bank account was worth it.

Benefited me. I wanted to see it. It made me understand this whole thing a lot more. I went from thinking the kid was a psycho and mentally ill, to having zero sympathy for his emotional state whatsoever and thinking he was a worthless piece of shitt. It bothered me more after watching it, which is good. Because if that's the same effect it had on a lot of people, especially those in the educational, security, mental illness and related fields maybe they will work harder to make it more difficult for this to happen again. I thinking looking into the madness that video showed makes you understand how it works and the degrees it goes to more. I think it's news and 99% of the news has a right to be shown. I think it adds to the discussion, and promotes a more serious discussion in a LOT of areas, especially how far colleges should go once they learn a student has some mental issues. And yes, I do think that video adds to that specific discussion a lot, because maybe students will see how the earlier reports and shots of that kid led to these particular shots and viewpoint of this fukk. Personally, I think watching him recite his bullschit manifesto gave it less credence than if I just read about it.

[Booster4324]

Benefited me. I wanted to see it. It made me understand this whole thing a lot more. I went from thinking the kid was a psycho and mentally ill, to having zero sympathy for his emotional state whatsoever and thinking he was a worthless piece of shitt. It bothered me more after watching it, which is good. Because if that's the same effect it had on a lot of people, especially those in the educational, security, mental illness and related fields maybe they will work harder to make it more difficult for this to happen again. I thinking looking into the madness that video showed makes you understand how it works and the degrees it goes to more. I think it's news and 99% of the news has a right to be shown. I think it adds to the discussion, and promotes a more serious discussion in a LOT of areas, especially how far colleges should go once they learn a student has some mental issues. And yes, I do think that video adds to that specific discussion a lot, because maybe students will see how the earlier reports and shots of that kid led to these particular shots and viewpoint of this fukk. Personally, I think watching him recite his bullschit manifesto gave it less credence than if I just read about it.

 

I agree to a certain point. I think the film should have been shown to a select crowd. Say those in educational, security, mental illness and related fields. Those who might have a professional interest in preventing such a crime. I dont agree with those who say everyone should be armed, because I dont think a bunch of amatuers with handguns should be shooting the place up to protect themselves. I hope you arent implying that a bunch of amatuer psychologists (bolded section above) who might themselves be the bullies, will be on the lookout for these deranged individuals. I assume I am misreading that bit as I have always had the utmost respect for you as a poster.

 

While you yourself might have had a reason to try to understand that sick pathetic mans viewpoint I doubt that the majority of the viewers wanted to or even needed to. I further assume you have a genuine interest in individuals like this and want to ensure nothing like this ever happens again.

 

The further grief as small as it might be that was brought to the families of the victims by this abhorrent money grubbing tactic rubs me raw though. The media stepped over the line this time and they know it. This was proved by the fact they yanked it quickly, while of course in the Columbine stuff they waited a year at least. Question is...will they have yanked it quickly enough before it influenced another psycho?

 

My take and no assault on you intended Kelly.

[Kelly the Dog]

I agree to a certain point. I think the film should have been shown to a select crowd. Say those in educational, security, mental illness and related fields. Those who might have a professional interest in preventing such a crime. I dont agree with those who say everyone should be armed, because I dont think a bunch of amatuers with handguns should be shooting the place up to protect themselves. I hope you arent implying that a bunch of amatuer psychologists (bolded section above) who might themselves be the bullies, will be on the lookout for these deranged individuals. I assume I am misreading that bit as I have always had the utmost respect for you as a poster.

 

While you yourself might have had a reason to try to understand that sick pathetic mans viewpoint I doubt that the majority of the viewers wanted to or even needed to. I further assume you have a genuine interest in individuals like this and want to ensure nothing like this ever happens again.

 

The further grief as small as it might be that was brought to the families of the victims by this abhorrent money grubbing tactic rubs me raw though. The media stepped over the line this time and they know it. This was proved by the fact they yanked it quickly, while of course in the Columbine stuff they waited a year at least. Question is...will they have yanked it quickly enough before it influenced another psycho?

 

My take and no assault on you intended Kelly.

No offense taken whatsoever, it's an interesting argument. And I can't believe that I feel the need to keep posting this over and over in different circumstances, but things aren't yes or no, and so black and white. I completely understand the idea that the video shouldn't be shown. Surely there are serious downsides. My feeling is that it's not a clear cut decision and everything is right about it but it is more like 60-40 or even 55-45 in favor. And I am open to being convinced otherwise. Right now I think it is better to show it, and if I was in charge, I would choose to show it.

 

I think they yanked it for several reasons, and I don't think these people are nearly as heartless as people make them out to be. I work in the entertainment field and I know most of the people don't want to make big crappy violent stupid sex crazed movies, they almost all want to make Laurence of Arabia. But more people buy Larry the Cable Guy than Larry the Arabia Guy, so that is what they make. Same thing with the news media. I am very certain they talked a lot about it, and they understand the downside. They just aren't going to make that decision to not show it, none of them are, because that's just not good business. They slowed down because it had already been shown, they got their sizzle, and now there is a backlash and they are feeling the heat. They don't need to show it anymore.

 

And again, I understand these people are highly offended by this fukk getting any attention or glory. I simply just don't see it being really much worse for them, in truth. It's already at 100%. If anything, I think it may be good that they are placing some of their furor and heartache at the media, because it needs to be vented as much as possible.

[Kelly the Dog]

Another thing that drives me nuts is everyone clamoring that the university should have kicked this kid out of school and that would have prevented it. Yeah, maybe. But does anyone think after seeing that kid that this would have worked? That he wouldn't have walked on campus the same way or else just walked into a mall and done the same thing?

[meazza]

Another thing that drives me nuts is everything clamoring that the university should have kicked this kid out of school and that would have prevented it. Yeah, maybe. But does anyone think after seeing that kid that this would have worked? That he wouldn't have walked on campus the same way or else just walked into a mall and done the same thing?

 

I don't know much about the area but is that the most populated place in Virginia? My guess would be yes. If this guy had a mission, chances are he would have went through with it whether it be a school or another populated area.

 

An example would be this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimveer_Gill. He had plans to shoot up to 6 schools. He chose that one because it was one of the most populated, and if his plan failed, there was a mall right next to it (where the old forum was) and had plenty of targets. Luckily in this case, the police were already in the area arresting some junkies and shot him before it got out of hand.

 

There is no way you could prevent this kind of thing from happening IMHO.

[Pete]

I don't know much about the area but is that the most populated place in Virginia? My guess would be yes. If this guy had a mission, chances are he would have went through with it whether it be a school or another populated area.

 

An example would be this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimveer_Gill. He had plans to shoot up to 6 schools. He chose that one because it was one of the most populated, and if his plan failed, there was a mall right next to it (where the old forum was) and had plenty of targets. Luckily in this case, the police were already in the area arresting some junkies and shot him before it got out of hand.

 

There is no way you could prevent this kind of thing from happening IMHO.

Freedom! Its a byproduct of freedom. Any lunatic could load their backpack and walk into any crowded place and blow themselves up. No stopping that-its part of the price we pay for freedom

[Wacka]

It's official:

 

The media is now lower than lawyers. I never thought anything could beat the sliminess of lawyers.

[RuntheDamnBall]

It's official:

 

The media is now lower than lawyers. I never thought anything could beat the sliminess of lawyers.

Again, anti-media brigade, I ask you, who is funding this? Corporate dollars got Don Imus off the air and they keep the news on it. I'm not saying "corporations bad," but I am saying that the deregulated, hysterical thirst for information and getting it out there first, as much of it as possible, cannot happen without the support of corporate entities. That's a whole lot more of America than just a segment of reporters, writers, producers and production crews. If you really hate it and you work for a company that advertises on CNN, MSNBC, etc, get the ball rolling and tell them to pull their ads on such networks. Or if you use a company's products, get a campaign going that says we're going to boycott anybody who advertises on these channels.

 

If you've decided you can't do that, or that you need that product too much, well, you play your part is all I'm saying.

 

Until it's decided by advertisers that this is not, indeed, what we want, we're going to get it.

[The Dean]

It's official:

 

The media is now lower than lawyers. I never thought anything could beat the sliminess of lawyers.

 

 

How about Insurance Companies?

[DC Tom]

Another thing that drives me nuts is everyone clamoring that the university should have kicked this kid out of school and that would have prevented it. Yeah, maybe. But does anyone think after seeing that kid that this would have worked? That he wouldn't have walked on campus the same way or else just walked into a mall and done the same thing?

 

They shouldn't have enrolled him in the first place. It's the admissions department's fault.

[ofiba]

They shouldn't have enrolled him in the first place. It's the admissions department's fault.

 

For real. How was this kid even passing classes? Richard McBeef sounds like it was written by a 10 year old.