Feel free to interpret my post however you wish - including misinterpreting the plain words I used.
I was responding to language in the cited material: “we’re fascinated by evildoers, … obsessions… go through the roof. … a nation with an unceasing appetite…”. I am not interested/obsessed, and have little appetite.
I often find it curious that a large potion of society repeatedly gets very interested in particular crime stories. But I do not know how many folk are truly interested, or whether the interest and media coverage reflects widespread interest or the media’s desire to drive interest. I appreciate that aceplace was referring solely to his and his family’s interest. I said NOTHING which could be reasonably interpreted as “wondering why anyone would be interested.” Instead, I questioned the cited materials suggestion as to how widespread/universal the interest is. I accept that you may not find my interest interesting.
You’re speculating that this is the first time she’s encountered the “savage side” of humanity. That’s not a safe assumption to make about any 84-year-old, perhaps especially a woman.
Sure, it’s highly likely that her current abuse is the worst brutal and savage thing that’s ever been done to her, but by no means guaranteed that it’s the first.
Ok. I’ll put the smile back on and hope for the best. Let’s follow the news and proceed forward.
This case has been pretty strange. It will be interesting to follow any new developments.
It is odd the people responsible are still sending messages and trying to get bitcoin. They must be aware of law enforcement’s resources and their efforts to find them, and find Nancy.
Pretty much nothing has been said about Savannah’s deceased father (1988), who died when she was 16 on some sort of ‘mining’ operation in Mexico. Aside from a press mention that he graduated from Georgia Tech in 1961 with a BS in Industrial Management, info on him is pretty dog-gone slim. He died suddenly of a heart attack at @49. His father, Savannah’s Gramps Clyde Guthrie, was president of a Coal Company in Harlan County, KY, and also died suddenly of a heart attack at age 62.
@aceplace57 often gets very “involved" in the details of alarming news stories. It’s a hobby horse of his. In a Miss Marple way. I am interested in these stories as well.
Guthrie is the mother of a very famous media person.
Yes it’s news. Whether a more moderate person pays much attention or not.
I suspect the family of this poor missing, inoffensive 84yo. actually prefers we keep talking about the story.
One benefit of widespread interest is more focus and resources are devoted to solving the case. If the mother of Random Nobody is abducted, the local police and FBI will do a minimum of effort to solve the case. But when the mother of Famous Celebrity is abducted, it’s covered in the news 24/7, which pressures the authorities to do everything they can to solve the case.
There’s nothing new about morbid curiosity. The only thing mass media brings to the table is giving the entire world the opportunity to join in.
You may think this particular case is the media’s attempt to drive ratings, but signing up for a true crime podcast is completely voluntary, and they’re pretty popular.
I think this is the reason the story is driving media interest. Savannah has been on the Today show for years - millions of people have that show on every weekday morning, and the crew, like them or not, are present in homes around the country on a daily basis. People spend time with these celebrities, even if virtually, and they are like friends to many people - that’s by design (the format of Today and other morning shows). Of course, if you are not a Today show viewer, the story wont resonate as much.
Thanks all. I do not watch morning news shows. When I first heard this news, I thought the name sounded vaguely familiar. Perhaps as the host of a holiday parade or something else I paid minimal attention to, or perhaps just in the way celebrities get mentioned in the media - whether or not you seek it out or read past the headline.
I’m sure such curiosity is timeless. I think the first time I noticed it was with the Menendez Brothers’ trial. Since then, it seems as though one crime story or another has dominated the media/public attention at any particular time. At times I’ve thought it would be interesting to track the history of which stories were dominant when. And some such stories seem to remain regional, whereas others get larger attention.
Following such stories is certainly as innocuous as many other pastimes. I am not saying that someone ought not be interested in this story when I express my curiosity as to how widespread that attention actually is. If someone follows the story and discusses it with their friends and family, it might seem like everyone is interested. By the same measure, if on is not following it and no one around them is bringing up, …
Savannah normally would be on TV heavily during the 2026 Winter Olympics. I think she’s covered the Summer Olympics for NBC?
I can’t recall for sure. She gets a lot of assignments for that network.
Savannah is a fairly high-profile personality and that creates more attention on her missing mother. The tech behind the demands for bitcoin payment is unfamiliar and new to some of the viewing public.
There’s also a strong suggestion that the motivation for the crime is an assumption (by the perpetrators) that Savannah is well-payed by NBC.
You’ve gotta go way back from that. It seems like every decade of the 20th Century has had their own “Trial of the Century” that dominated the public’s attention. Ever since news stories became nationwide, this has existed.
Yeah. I just really wondered about it starting w/ the Menedezes. Maybe some time I’ll try to come up with a timeline to see how continuously there has been one predominant “crime” story or another, and how long goes between such stories.
