It’s quite normal for NBC to insist on a mandatory “super” (short for ‘superimposition’) for video of this magnitude/newsworthiness. I would be more shocked if the images DIDN’T have the super. NBC just burns it on the image themselves instead of trusting all the other news outlets to put it up and leave it up the whole time.
Part of the reason for the large size and location of the graphic is that nearly all stations/networks run constant bugs in the corner of the screen. It’s usually in the lower right of the picture. The bug is added to the image on top of everything else so if you have important video that you know other stations are going to use and you want your super not to be covered up, you usually put it in a upper corner. Many stations also run crawls at the bottom which would also cover up a competitor’s graphic.
When one network has exclusive video of a big, big news event it is understood that the competing networks will use it too. They don’t pay for it. However, the network that owns the video could dictate the terms of use (like insisting on mandatory courtesy supers). The owner could also only allow limited uses or repetitions of the video, but I don’t think that happens very much. I think in general, the more important the video, the less chance there would be any restrictions on it. The video of Reagan getting shot is a good example of this.
I guess it’s possible that networks DO pay for other network’s video nowadays, but I would be very, very surprised. They don’t pay because if they have an understanding that any of them will share critical exclusive news video.
Newspapers don’t have to run a big old graphic like that (superimposed on the photo) when they use the picture from NBC. They need only credit the source. Usually, that’s in small type underneath. It’s quite easy to read that small type when reading a paper, but when you watch TV you need something a lot bigger.
And a newspaper won’t normally run the logo (the peacock, e.g.). Then again, a TV network won’t run a newspaper’s logo either when they use a still from the paper (unless they are making a fancy graphic that probably has quotes in large fonts that move around and stuff.
Don’t blame the media, blame everyone watching. If NBC ran this story and got a 0.0 rating, they would cease to do it. Kind of a contradiction to say the media is sick for showing something that everyone is watching.
Slight difference with the Unabomber as he was yet uncaught, but good point.
Most of these types do it in part for the “fame” they’ll get, and nothing about the media coverage of this one will change the mind of anyone contemplating one as we speak.
I noticed this too, and thought it was kind of gross.
It strikes me as an odd decision to prominently associate the NBC brand with these disturbing images. I’d insist on something more understated (or at least black and white, or something) just to distance this nastiness from my entertainment product.
Ah, another group added to the outrage list. Personally, on the list of things that concern me about this event this would be next to the University President reading a prepared statement…which happens to be pretty low.
Actually I was a bit amused by what seemd to be jealousy from somebody at CNN who asked, “Why did he send to NBC?” Something in the tone of her voice made me think what she really wanted to say was, 'Why did they send it to NBC…and not us?"
Yeah, me too, and that was why the logo was there. Too bad they couldn’t have sent a better sound man, though, because the guy they used was totally incompetent. Maybe he was from the local affiliate.
Not a good point, and a huge difference. There’s no law enforcement reason to air this crap, and it’s just going to encourage every other nutbar seeking a self-aggrandizing way to go out in a blaze of glory. They absolutely should not have aired it. In fact. they shouldn’t have even opened the thing - the postal service alerted them that it was likely from the shooter; they should have left it on a table, untouched, until the FBI could get there to retrieve it.
There is a lot of anger over the airing of the tape(s), from the head of the Virginia police (or the head of their investigation?) to family members of the victims to students at VT, with a chorus rising among the national media (once they have displayed them, of course), and in a lot of letters to editors or blogs.
I have not yet seen any explicit public criticism of the NBC logo, (although I have seen many arch references to its presence on the tapes displayed by other outlets).
Michael Shaw on Huffington took a good swipe at NBC’s use og the logo, but the responses seem to indicate that he did not quite convey the message he was hoping to.
By airing the video, NBC game the killer exactly what he wanted. People who wouldn’t have remembered his looks in two months now will have a mental image of him for years, if not decades. All with the NBC logo implanted on it.
If my Today Show memory serves it wasn’t the postal service that alerted them. I think Mr. Lauer said it was their internal mail room that recognized the name and alerted them that it might be from Cho.
The night it started airing, I saw about 5 minutes of the footage and turned it off. The reporters looked like they couldn’t contain their excitement over being sent the footage. My worry is that every nut job who wants to go out in a blaze of assholism is going to pull the same shit. Send off video, go on rampage, be famous.
I realize this isn’t a pit thread for all the media but it should be.
Since people have started complaining about the extreme bad taste of airing those videos the media has realized that people actually don’t want as much sensationalism as they can shove down our throats and now they have taken another tactic. For the past few days each news show has to spend about 10 minutes telling us how wonderful they are because they decided not to air the videos anymore. :rolleyes: