Ethics of the VT coverage

Whenever such a huge national tragedy happens, I think it’s always good to look at how the media covers it. Have the media been ethic and responsible or are they using the tragedy as a way to help ratings? There’s never a clear cut answer, but here’s a snapshot of what I’ve found.

I came across many voices who think that the shootings were handled well. Washington Post writer Howard Kurtz was positive about the coverage, as of Tuesday morning. He praised the network anchors who hurried down to the scene as soon as possible. While I’ve heard some people say this was just the big wigs bigfooting the story, I have to agree with Kurtz. I like seeing anchors get their feet dirty in the field. Sure, any of the correspondents could have covered it on-scene, but I think it’s more respectful to have the anchors there. Otherwise, they’re just sitting in their comfy news stations pretending they understand what’s going on.

And of course there are the many voices who are seriously criticizing the coverage. Jack Shafer of Slate.com calls the way some reporters are acting as “Cold. Very cold.” I agree with some of his points. I'm sure the classic question from the insensitive journalist (How do you feel?) is making its rounds. The frenzied media circus on the Virginia Tech campus must be a striking contrast to the way students and faculty are slowly and silently trying to get through the days. The last thing they need is to be pressed for interviews and exploited.

In my opinion, it’s just too easy to completely trash the media coverage. Of course there are journalists who get caught up in the opportunity to make it big and end up covering it insensitively. But the world must know what’s going on. They must see the pain on these people’s faces to know the depth of what happened. It’s all in how it’s handled.

One thing I don’t like is NBC’s release of the "manifesto" they got from the shooter. What good can come of this? The public does not need to see the rantings of this lunatic. Pictures and videos of him are now posted everywhere, online and on tv. There is no need for that. I also don’t like the incessant 24/7 coverage. We need a break and so do those involved. It’s easy to get caught up in a hyper-reality with all of this coverage of a single event. There are other stories we should stay informed about, too.

All in all, I think the media started out covering the shootings well, but as time goes on, it’s moving towards exploitation and sensationalism. Maybe media outlets need to take a step back for a moment and calm it down a bit before it continues to get worse.