In the wake of the shootings in a Colorado theater last week, Sean D. sent in a BBC video clip commenting on media coverage of mass murders. It criticizes the typical response, which usually involves intense coverage dissecting every piece of the story, focusing closely on the killer and his motivations. This can go on for days.
The narrator argues that this is exploitative — the media is using gruesome events to drive ratings (often for days at a time) — and it feeds into the public’s tendency towards voyeurism. He also includes an interview with a forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Park Dietz, who specializes in such cases; he says that this type of coverage is the exact opposite of what the media should do… if it is interested in saving lives. The attention, especially to the criminal himself, encourages other “anti-heros” to contemplate and execute mass murders themselves.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 10
decius — July 23, 2012
Right. Because all the not-coverage that actual mass murderers get really discourages them, right? Oh, wait, those are somebody else's problem, because we can't pass knee-jerk overreacting ineffective legislation that would have mildly inconvenienced them.
How many people died today of inadequate hand washing at hospitals? In 2000, the average was about 7 infants per day, (not counting any other group) which I guess makes it 7/12 as threatening as crazed gunmen who kill 12 in a single event.
Yunnan Chen — July 23, 2012
Charlie Brooker: awesome. I would highly recommend watching his other stuff, he produces some very cleverly written and dry satire of all types of media coverage - news formats, TV shows, presenters etc. often focusing in on their self-serving, ridiculous behaviours in their attempts to expose and sell their media. Grumpy english wit at its finest.
The psychologist's pronouncement at the end was disturbing, but also sadly, probably quite accurate. However given the need for sensationalism in TV and news to attract viewers and ratings, and the competition between news channels, it's virtually impossible to ask one channel to tone down its coverage - it's asking them to lose money (at least in their logic). I can't see an end to the media circus cycle. Once it begins, it goes news 24.
Carl Root — July 23, 2012
"The day after Columbine, I was interviewed for the Tom Brokaw news
program. The reporter had been assigned a theory and was seeking sound
bites to support it. “Wouldn’t you say,” she asked, “that killings like
this are influenced by violent movies?” No, I said, I wouldn’t say that.
“But what about Basketball Diaries?” she asked. “Doesn’t that have a
scene of a boy walking into a school with a machine
gun?” The obscure 1995 Leonardo Di Caprio movie did indeed have a brief
fantasy scene of that nature, I said, but the movie failed at the box
office (it grossed only $2.5 million), and it’s unlikely the Columbine
killers saw it. The reporter looked disappointed, so I offered her my
theory. “Events like this,” I said, “if they are influenced by anything,
are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid
walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event.
Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with
it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were
packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia. The message is clear to other
disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be
famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to
figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see
they shouldn’t have messed with me. I’ll go out in a blaze of glory.”
In short, I said, events like Columbine are influenced far less by
violent movies than by CNN, the NBC Nightly News and all the other news
media, who glorify the killers in the guise of “explaining” them. I
commended the policy at the Sun-Times, where our editor said the paper
would no longer feature school killings on Page 1. The reporter thanked
me and turned off the camera. Of course the interview was never used.
They found plenty of talking heads to condemn violent movies, and
everybody was happy." --Roger Ebert, 2003
myblackfriendsays — July 23, 2012
After the Virginia Tech murders, NBC got a package filled with videos and other material from the killer. He wanted it to be delivered the same day as the shootings, but addressed it incorrectly.
NBC did show a few of the photos and snippets of the videos, but not nearly as much as they could have. I think the media understands on some level the line between reporting and exploitation.I am actually glad that the killer in Aurora didn't kill himself like so many of these men do; hopefully psychologists can study him and learn more about what motivates people like this and what we can do to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
[video] Media Coverage of Mass Murders « slendermeans — August 23, 2012
[...] more: sociologicalimages] [share]ShareEmailFacebookTwitterTumblrPinterestStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like [...]
quick hit: Media Coverage of Mass Murders | feimineach — December 30, 2013
[…] [Read more: sociologicalimages] […]