WHO IS TO BLAME for these continuing killings?
Leaving aside the root causes of the disassociation of the killers, there are two economic groupings who clearly revel in these killings since they shamelessly rush to gain and to make profit from these events.
The news media and the arms industry must jointly share the blame for the school shootings, and mass killings which occur in the US.
Firstly, I blame the News media. Especially those stations who rush crews to the scene of those killings so as to be first with rolling coverage of so-called "breaking news."
Secondly, I blame the National Rifle Association (NRA) and all those who make a living from promoting the sale of firearms or from the sale of firearms.
The arms industry is bad enough, since it creates the means for these copy-cat killers to repeat Columbine over and over again.
But most of the blood, in my view, is on the hands of those working in and profiting from the news media networks who cover this type of event. The fact of the coverage, and the targeted and sensational way in which they focus on each perpetrator does something even worse - it creates the desire in others. The result. More copy-cat killings.
Until the news media critically re-evaluate their role is all this, the killings will go on and on. I make no apology for saying that the present manner in which networks like CNN and Sky cover these events is in fact, not only immoral, it is criminal!
The news channels & news media
When these mass killings first occurred years ago, it was perhaps justified for the media to cover them. They were new and shocking, and indeed constituted news. +Columbine Massacre
But, as time has gone on, the question arises as to whether the news coverage serves any purpose, save to elevate some unhappy, troubled soul from obscurity into being the centrepiece of the story.
Each time a massacre occurs, whether it be at a school, a military base, or whatever, the news channels rush to be first to find out who the perpetrator was, and to provide a sensational expose of the perpetrator's life. They shamelessly profit from the victims whose blood has not had a chance to dry and they do it knowing that if they do a good job, it will create the desire to do copy cat killings, and that it is only a matter of time before their coverage pushes another disturbed soul over the tipping point.
Firstly, it must be questioned whether these events are even newsworthy at all. They occur so often now, that one such event merges into the next one, all following a boringly familiar pattern.
Let's be fair. These killers are normally troubled, lonely, people with mental issues, who were far from newsworthy prior to their vile deeds. The fact that they have committed a massacre ought not to change that.
These people are usually boring nonentities (from a newsworthiness point of view) whose anger at their perceived anonymity etc. seems to evoke feelings of rage. Each potential copy-cat was surely a viewer of the coverage of a previous event, and thus they are all well aware that, thanks to the media, other people in their position who went on to commit mass killings underwent a sudden rise from obscurity to being notorious or infamous.
We live in a world where being famous is considered to be not only desirable, but essential. An unhealthy obsession with celebrity defines modern western society, especially the US. Reality Television shows like America's Got Talent and Idols thrive on this obsession and their ability to create instant stars from people who are unknown has only made this obsession worse. Their is a feeling amongst many of the modern youth that if one is not famous, one is a failure or one is inadequate.
There are probably two main reasons why perpetrators of mass killings do so. Firstly they are arguably motivated by a need to have their revenge against society for, as they view it, ignoring them or for failing them in some way.
Secondly, it cannot be seriously doubted that most if not all of the more recent mass killers have watched the media coverage of other mass killers, and have become envious of their instant rise from obscurity to, as they see it, "celebrity" status.
I am convinced that many of those who commit mass killings have committed their deeds because of the publicity they believe they will receive. Such is the desire for that publicity that they are quite content to proceed knowing that this publicity may only occur after their deaths.
The fact that some of these people have made videos setting out the reasons for their actions, or have posted their reasons on the internet, only proves that there is merit in what I am saying.
This raises the question.
Why do the news media identify the killer and why do they do in-depth programmes about his life?
Their pretence that such "investigative journalism" will provide any new reasons for the tragedy, is nothing but an excuse to overlook the blood on their hands for their role in encouraging the present killing, not to mention the many killings which their present expose will cause.
The truth is that every one of these killers fits an all too familiar profile. The person is lonely, mentally unstable, prone to rage, etc.
Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with the academic study of all of these killers to learn something about how to prevent these events from recurring. Such a study, however, need not mention the names of the individual killers.
In my view, the media should agree on some form of code of conduct to deal with these incidents. If everyone agreed never to mention the name of the killers, that would be a start. Even better if no news networks turned up at the scene.
Why not work towards an agreement by all tv news stations that everyone will report such events by a one or two liner at the end of the news:
"There was another school shooting at a school in Tallahassee today. A senior student apparently shot and killed fourteen fellow school pupils, before killing himself. Twelve others are reported to be seriously injured. And now, here's James with the weather.
Out of respect for the victims, and due to a need to report news responsibly, this network, has joined others and refused to afford events of this nature any significant coverage. By doing so, this network, together with others, seeks to play its part in downgrading the newsworthiness of events such as these. We believe this this approach will assist to prevent further copy cat killings."
No breaking news. No coverage of the killer. No sensation. No coverage of the event, save to report its occurrence. And none of these reports about the lives of those killed. After all, and with due respect to all those who die in these events, if you weren't newsworthy before, you aren't suddenly newsworthy because you were shot and killed.
I realise that many will say that my proposals amount to a violation of the right to free speech, and is also a violation of the right to a free media. However, is it really? Who is harmed if the name of a killer is withheld? Why do we need to know the intimate details of the life of some loser? Who loses out if the media do not cover senseless killings with their rolling coverage. Nobody.
How many lives could be saved if the media report these incidents in a responsible way? Many.
And so, in considering how to cover such events, the media have a responsibility to use their freedom responsibly. There is a need for the media to self-regulate their coverage of mass killings. If they fail to do so, then reluctantly, I would support the introduction of legislation to do so.
All constitutional freedoms need to be balanced against other constitutional rights. The freedom to report on mass killings in detail needs to be weighed up against the value to society of the information reported, and against the right to life of the victims in future shootings. Society can no longer permit the media to elevate such mass killers from obscurity to that of an "icon" or to virtual "celebrity" status.
It is time for the media, especially Television news, to critically examine their coverage of mass killings and to make appropriate changes. Simply refusing to mention the name of a killer, refusing to show his videos or mention his website, and refusing to show his picture would be a great start!
It would send a message to those considering mass killing as a way to publicise themselves or their cause that if they do commit such a crime, they will be denied the media coverage and the resulting notoriety their predecessors once received.
I am not arguing for censorship. I am arguing for networks and journalists to swop sensationalist coverage for investigative journalism into the causes of these events. Reports on the causes and possible methods of preventing these killings, which leave out the names of the killers, would assist to reverse the problem.
I suspect, however, the media will continue as before, to cover these events in a manner calculated to create the desire for celebrity status and for some recognition in the mind of future killers. And thus, they not only profit from the present massacre, they shamefully assist to sow the seeds of many massacres to come.
Sadly, this might only stop when a class action, by the families of the next victim, uses expert evidence to show the active role the news media played in creating the desire to do a copy-cat killing, and thereby pushing the killer over the edge. Be warned. Its a story a jury will easily buy!
The NRA & the purveyors of arms
The role of NRA and those who sell firearms, in making firearms so easily available to almost anyone in the United States is well documented.
Again, the NRA rely upon the constitutional right to bear arms. This right is regarded as sacrosanct despite the loss of the right to life of thousands of people to fire-arms in criminal incidents.
I don't propose to add more to the voluminous arguments advanced by each side on this topic. Save to say that it appears to me, and to most people from outside the US, that the one right is being advanced for commercial reasons, and that the other right is being sacrificed in the process.
Footnote: +The Erlkings +The Erlkings #TheErlkings +Columbine Killers
I recently learned on +Sky News that some "playwright" has decided to put on a play about the last year or so of the lives of the two killers involved in the Columbine massacre. He has apparently done extensive research into their lives and apparently believes that society missed important signs of their intentions.
To my horror, I discovered that the play will rely in great detail on the actual incident and will also use the protagonists real names. If this is true I condemn this as an outrage and also as exploitation. All those who put on this play will have to ask themselves whether their efforts to provide further publicity to the killers concerned will, in concert with the efforts of the news media, only serve to further encourage more depressed teenagers to seek such notoriety.
As a sign of respect to the victims of Columbine, I call upon the playwright and the producers to remove all references to Columbine High and to change the names the names of the killers in the play.
I accept, from the excerpt I saw on Sky, that the producers did a lot of research and believe that their play will serve perhaps to educate people as to why the boys acted as they did and what signs and/or opportunities were missed by the School or the parents, police etc....
As I said in the main blog, I support all academic attempts to study these events, to learn from them and with a view to possibly preventing a reoccurrence in future. Surely, however, this can be done without maintaining, or contributing to the "celebrity" status of these killers by referring to their names.
If its necessary to mention the School's name to ensure higher attendances, then perhaps that could pass. But mentioning the names of the killers in a play is totally unjustified and unforgivable on any basis. I hope that the playwright, whose intentions may indeed be honourable, will carefully consider my plea to them.
For the perpetrators of these incidents to be relegated to obscurity, someone has to start them on that journey. I hope that this someone will be the playwright. Perhaps he could then also examine the role of the news media in future plays and end his play with an appropriate appeal to the news media and to the public to put pressure on the news media. After all, the media, given the public what they think the public wants. Do we want to know the names of the killers? No we do not. Leave their names to the Police and to the families of the victims....
Siegfried Walther
Cape Town. 30 Oct 2014
See also: this link which also very eloquently argues the same self-evident point: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/does-media-coverage-of-school-shootings-lead-to-more-school-shootings/Content?oid=20329038
How can lawyers defend those they suspect are guilty. Here's the answer. http://siegfriedwalther.blogspot.com/2014/01/defending-guilty.html
COMPLETE guide To getting started on ITUNES, equalising volumes of different songs, & finally creating a "radio station" which always plays your favourite tunes....
http://siegfriedwalther.blogspot.com/2014/10/creating-radio-station-playlist-from.html
TOP-125 17 OCT 2014 DJ@Sgwalther from Cape Town
http://siegfriedwalther.blogspot.com/2014/10/top-125-from-djsgwalther-17-october-2014.html
@SkyNews.com
+Sky News
+CNN.com
#SkyNews
#Sky News
#CNN
#massacres
#masshootings
#NRA
+National Rifle AssociationT
