Media coverage under question after mass shootings

Though the world did not end this last December, for many of us it certainly seemed like it would, as our TVs broadcasted horrible images and tales of school/public shootings.

For seemingly week after week, another occurrence seemed to arise, and more gray photos of mad-men became ingrained in our memories.

Along with these shootings came heated debates on gun control, violence in video games and film and various other related topics. But what you don’t often hear about from these news channels is how they themselves may be a part of the problem.

In the BBC program “Charlie Brooker’s Newswipe” the host touches upon the topic of shootings, how the media covers them and how this coverage may be affecting society in negative ways.

In the program, a clip of a forensic psychiatrist by the name of Dr. Park Dietz is shown where he says that for 20 years he has asked various media groups such as CNN and other media outlets to change the way that they cover such occurrences. By having this constant coverage of the shootings and in general putting much of the focus on the shooter themselves, the body count, showing various photos of the shooter, that these programs can often instigate other similar shootings to take place within the following weeks.

Now, the easiest thing to do when there is a problem is to blame someone else. The hardest thing to do is find an answer to that problem. Shootings like the Sandy Hook elementary in Newtown, Conn., or the Clackamas Town Center shooting were not because of just one thing.

Just the media cannot be held responsible for these shootings. Just as video games, movies, and American’s love of automatic weaponry cannot nor should be held solely responsible.

That being said, they could still be factors. As such, these shootings have caused many of us at The Advocate to look more closely at just how we and other media groups deal with covering such sensitive and tragic events and just what are role as journalists is.

Referring back the Charlie Brooker segment, there arises the question of just why is it that the shooter in general receives so much attention whereas the victims often are an afterthought?

When deciding what kind of information to put out whether it via television or newspaper, journalists often must try and choose what would be most interesting to their readers.

And in this case, and most “shooter” cases for the most part, it seems that knowing why the shooter did what he did, how he went about doing it becomes what most people want to read or watch about.

By putting all this focus on the shooter, the shootings almost become “glamorized” and that can become the final “push” for some people who are having similar violent thoughts into committing them.

Media has and will be responsible for making information available to the public. The public relies on the media for all information that they otherwise would not have access to.

The ability to spread information, ideas and opinions to hundreds and even thousands of people is a powerful one and discretion should be had, even if it means sacrificing some viewership.