NBC Airs Murderer's Message - Why?

[ACP]

"I heard one NBC reporter refer to the "multi-media presentation" as the murderers "legacy" :: puke::"

The killer thought it was his legacy, not the reporter. And it's not a "legacy" in the good sense of the word, either (obviously).

And it was a "multi-media" presentation, whether you like it or not. Still photos, video, and printed statements are "multi media."

It's 2007, not 1957. We're not looking for a diary under lock and key hidden in a sock drawer to fathom some psycopath's motive. Nowadays, they take digital pictures, make homemade videos, post stuff on the Internet, send e-mails, join in chat rooms, and leave lots of electronic evidence. Who knows, 50 years from now they might be leaving laser-generated 3-D images that pop out of a device the size of your high school ring. No one said murderers couldn't be up to speed on technology. They're just dangerous sociopaths that need to be protected against and executed when caught.

 

[Durruti]

What I'm hearing is that companies have no business putting profits ahead of social responsibilities.

I'm amazed at how many anti-capitalists we have here.

Durruti
(a socialist myself, of the anti-government sort)

 

[Cosmoline]

Yeah, make the family suffer even more than they are. That will show 'em. Care to explain?

I didn't say it was a *nice* purpose, but it is a purpose. The fellow should never have been allowed out into public, and to the extent his family helped him out of legal problems and kept him in the game they do bear some of the fault here.

 

[Richmond]

"multi-media manifesto"

Of course, it would not be sensitive or politically correct to admit it, but media executives are no doubt gleeful at the ratings boost they received, first from the non-stop coverage of the event and then, just as that started to slow, the box of media materials from the killer. That they were playing a role in the twisted plan of someone who had just killed 2 innocents, and was dropping the box in the mail on his way to slaughter 30 more is an unfortunate truth – so they act appropriately sanctimonious, then get on with business and get the stuff on television. Cho certainly was successful in orchestrating the, so far, two day wall to wall media campaign devoted to him, the atrocity he committed and the twisted way he "thought".

The media solemnly tells us that they air this stuff to “inform” us and help us “understand”. They are really giving the killer what he wanted – worldwide attention and power. They are eagerly doing what is necessary to fill their pockets.

I would have more respect if they just told us the truth – they are running the stuff to feed off our perverse curiosity. Telling us otherwise is like running porn but claiming it is a biology lesson.

 

[Soybomb]

I would have more respect if they just told us the truth – they are running the stuff to feed off our perverse curiosity.

Isn't showing his original material the very meaning of showing us the truth behind the event? I don't want an interpretation of that material, I want to see it.

 

[obxned]

Sure makes you wonder why people aren't screaming for sensible laws limiting the 1st Amendment. After all, the Founding Fathers were actually thinking in terms of quill pens and hand presses.

 

[davec]

I think it's better we exist in the realm of rumor, innuendo, lies, and political agenda pontificating when it comes to this guys actions. It's much better as a society that we guess at it, or take some government officials word for it, rather then examine the evidence he left behind, and come to our own conclusions.

Because we as a society must be protected from ourselves, our own free thought, and our own intellectual abilities.

These things must be limited or restricted in the name of public safety, and sympathy for the victims.

 

[toivo]

Why air the message of this murderer? What's the point?

- The victims don't give a damn about what this nut has to say, and airing the footage is slap in the face.
- It gives the murderer what he had hoped to "earn" by killing all the victims - to have his screwed-up message heard.
- Other potential copy-cat murderers will learn how they, too, can "be heard."

Aside from greed, I can't think of why any network would air this tripe.

What am I missing?

Nothing, as far as I can see. You pretty much nailed it.

NBC got their "scoop." The killer got his wish: worldwide notoriety. The victims' families get to suffer even more from seeing the murderer of their loved ones glaring at them from TV screens and newsstands everywhere they go. Sick copycats get inspiration and some new ideas for their own exploits.

Way to go, NBC.

 

[Soybomb]

The victims' families get to suffer even more from seeing the murderer of their loved ones glaring at them from TV screens

Not to seem insensitive but why in the world are the grieving people watching the nightly news?

 

[Autolycus]

Exactly, .30 cal. What was the point?

To me, airing this somewhat parallels shouting "fire" in a theater. The public risk here is copycats. NBC doesn't have a "right" or "obligation" to do that.

Can you prove that it will cause copy cat shootings?

 

[Autolycus]

Do you know who is also a victim but I have not heard about. What about the parents of the shooter? I wonder how they feel? I feel sorry for them. I was thinking about this as the media just sensationalizes everything and everyone.

But in the end I have to send some thoughts to Cho's parents as well.

 

[Colt]

NEW YORK — With a backlash developing against the media for airing sickening pictures from Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung-Hui, Fox News Channel said Thursday it would stop and other networks said they would severely limit their use.

Family members of victims canceled plans to appear on NBC's "Today" show Thursday because they "were very upset" with the network for showing the pictures, "Today" host Meredith Vieira said.

Ingram wrote:

...so it is pretty pretentious to assume that the people most effected by this don't want to hear what drove Cho to do this.

Am I still being pretentious? Just checking.

Someone who kills 32 people doesn't have "a right to be heard." NBC doesn't have "a right to profit" from it, capitalism or not. They received evidence in the mail, not a cash cow.

While I admit that airing the footage helped to demonstrate how this twisted individual's dementia killed the victims, and not a gun, the same result could have been reached by having authorities/experts evaluate the material offline and then filing a report. There was no reason to let this nutbag spew his hate first-person on national television.

 

[JohnRov]

Look, we all complain when the media gives half the truth about guns, I don't want them filtering this either. I am an adult, I can come to my own conclusions, as was stated above.