Is the media coverage of the Virginia Tech tragedy appropriate?

[Hippy_Hollow]

@Quiddity Glomfuster

This is exactly the attitude that needs to be changed. He wasn’t a ‘coward’. His ability to reason sanely was severely impaired by an illness. This was not his fault. Nobody wants to be mentally ill - he did nothng to deserve it.

You may never have been in the presence of someone who is suffering a psychotic break. You may not really grok that people in that state are seeing and hearing things that don’t exist, and are neither sensible nor reasonable.

This poor guy deserves sympathy. I was watching a PBS show on mentally ill people last night (coincidental scheduling) and the psychiatrist who was one of the pioneers in treating mental illnesses said that having that kind of sickness is living in a constant nightmare. Imagine that. Imagine thinking every day that people are out to get you; rather imagine believing that with all your might. You can’t because your brain isn’t broken - spare a little sympathy for people whose brains are.

His illness caused him to feel that he had been victimized to the extent that he needed to fight back. If someone had spotted it years earlier and had been able to help him when he was still young enough, this might all have been prevented.

That he lived to 23 with all his demons is almost remarkable. Nothing is to be gained by putting him down and calling him names. Rather, people need to figure out how to determine if a person is seriously troubled and in need of help.

Sorry. I just can’t accept that someone who preys upon and murders 32 people is anything but a coward. Many historical figures, like Stalin, are suspected of being mentally ill. I still consider their actions horrific and cowardly.

I suppose that’s the limit of my human understanding. How do we determine who is mentally ill? With Cho we have a paper trail. What about the others that didn’t have access to such care? Is it reasonable to suspect that anyone that takes a life of a person who has done no harm to them is mentally ill? I don’t think that being mentally ill absolves one from being cowardly, just as it does not absolve someone from being brave.

[Kalhoun]

@Hippy Hollow

Sorry. I just can’t accept that someone who preys upon and murders 32 people is anything but a coward. Many historical figures, like Stalin, are suspected of being mentally ill. I still consider their actions horrific and cowardly.

I suppose that’s the limit of my human understanding. How do we determine who is mentally ill? With Cho we have a paper trail. What about the others that didn’t have access to such care? Is it reasonable to suspect that anyone that takes a life of a person who has done no harm to them is mentally ill? I don’t think that being mentally ill absolves one from being cowardly, just as it does not absolve someone from being brave.

I don’t get the use of the word “coward” here. What did he do that was cowardly?

1. a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person.

Where did he express any lack of courage? This definition doesn’t fit.

2. lacking courage; very fearful or timid.

He didn’t behave fearfully. He killed people. This definition doesn’t fit.

3. proceeding from or expressive of fear or timidity: a coward cry.

This isn’t working either.

[Hippy_Hollow]

@Kalhoun

I don’t get the use of the word “coward” here. What did he do that was cowardly?

Where did he express any lack of courage? This definition doesn’t fit.

He didn’t behave fearfully. He killed people. This definition doesn’t fit.

This isn’t working either.

This is veering off topic of the thread, but someone who kills other human beings without provocation or without meeting them on equal footing is a coward to me. Going into a battle with someone on equal footing is fair. I feel the shooter feared the people he attacked, which is why he chose to ambush them.

[SanibelMan]

For those interested in what media professionals think of the coverage, go to the Poynter Institute and listen to the podcasts from their broadcast journalism and media ethics professionals.

[Capa84]

On a gaming website I frequent, there are VT students there who were literally posting up the emails the campus was sending out as they got them, and updating us from on campus as it was happening (we’ve accounted for everyone that we know for sure attended VT, and all are safe, although some knew a few of the victims). Both of them have posted barely minutes apart that they really wished all the media would just leave the campus so they can begin the healing/recovering process.

I think they would like to see things there as close to normal as possible as soon as possible, so people can begin to try to move on. I’m sure that is pretty difficult when everywhere they go they are hit in the face with it.

edit-I left out my main point, which is that the media coverage from the outside may or may not be appropriate, but if it is affecting those that are left behind on the campus, it is certainly inappropriate to have such a physical presence there.

[Shamozzle]

@Capa84

<snip> Both of them have posted barely minutes apart that they really wished all the media would just leave the campus so they can begin the healing/recovering process. <snip>

Yes, I’m getting the clear sense that the media is the primary force that is driving the very controversy that they insist on rehashing in a strive for self-sustenance.