3 ms·
Giving mass murderers like this high-profile articles discussing their motivations, describing the details (closeups of the guns, the bit about booby trapping t
by smcl 9y ago
Giving mass murderers like this high-profile articles discussing their motivations, describing the details (closeups of the guns, the bit about booby trapping the house), portraying them as some anti-hero is EXACTLY what they want, and will only serve to nudge more people who are disturbed and have access to guns to do the same. Media will claim that it's not their responsibility to decide what's published. But they're essentially saying "if you kill enough people, we will probably give you a platform and talk about your message"
- zimpenfish 9y agoSee also: subsequent terrorist actions after high profile incidents; suicide sprees after high profile incidents; etc. Whilst I don't particularly want a shackled press, it would be nice if they did a little more reflection on what they're publishing. (See also: "but her emails")
- smcl 9y agoYeh it's hard - law restricting what they publish is absolutely not the way to go, but a bit more responsibility from editors would be good. It will never happen though, especially as some organisations are desperate for the extra eyeballs and the advertising $ they bring. Which makes it weird that the BBC wrote this ...
- Hasknewbie 9y agoWhat's more, evidences that perpetrator-obsessed media coverage does influence other would-be mass shooters has be known and published since the 1970s: http://fair.org/home/media-coverage-is-a-sort-of-advertisement-to-mass-murder/ http://fair.org/home/media-coverage-is-a-sort-of-advertiseme... https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/are-mass-shootings-contagious-some-scientists-who-study-how-viruses-spread-say-yes/2016/03/07/be44866a-df31-11e5-846c-10191d1fc4ec_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/are-mass-shootings-cont...