Does the media love mass shooting?

Coveny

Scholar
C
Joined
Sep 8, 2017
Messages
92
In defense of accusations that mainstream media loves mass shootings Alisyn Camerota of CNN says they aren't ratings gold because Americans are sick of it, but the networks actions speak louder than her words. We see the perp in these reports much more than the victims. Here is an article from experts begging the media to quit making these nutjobs famous, and yet they continue to do it... because it's ratings gold. I doubt you need me you to do the search showing CNN breaking these rules for the media on how they should deal with mass shooters. (because they break them all the time)

https://drive.google.com/.../0B4Z7VkWcwLk.../view
https://www.reportingonmassshootings.org/

This plays on human’s genetic disposition to "fear" when statistically it's not something you "should" be afraid of. We had 606 mass shooting deaths in 2016, and while every death is sad, and those who die young are the worst to bear, we have over 2 million people die a year in this country. Rather than spending all this energy on something that accounts for a small percentage of deaths why not work on helping the 40+ thousands who commit suicide a year? Champion stem cell research and prevent the over 100+ thousand who die from Alzheimer’s. Stop denying climate change and fight to save the 150+ thousand a year who die from chronic lower respiratory disease. There are countries that have guns without mass shootings, as well as it being debatable that removal of guns reduces crime. (It may reduce murder slightly depending on where you look and how many years out you look but it increases rape, burglary, etc)

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data/2016
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

Rather than address the mass shooter address what is causing of the problem: Wealth inequality in America. Rather than giving the rich huge tax cuts and killing 100’s thousands in other countries because the military complex desires us to do it. Make it so our education system is funded so we can be more competitive with other countries in our education. Make it so our health care is funded so the families don’t stress about getting the treatment they need. Make it so that both parents don’t have to work two jobs just to afford to pay the bills and have the money needed for their children. Make it so that the 60+ thousand veterans are no longer homeless. Make it so that the 40+ million who are food-insecure in this country can stop worrying about where (and if) their next meal is coming from. Make it so that young people can see a bright future again in this country.

We have a finite amount of energy to champion causes I understand that guns may seem to be the problem because of the way media agencies like CNN spam them, but they are just a symptom of the greater problem affecting 99% of Americas who are struggling to make ends meet. It may be callous to turn away from those deaths (or any deaths) and say, “other things are more important”, but we are talking about the greater good of the 320 million people who live in America, and the media spends WAY too much time making these shooters famous.
 
I'll never agree to a solution that is: the media just needs to stop reporting on this ****. Maybe not saying the shooters name? OK.

Rather than address the mass shooter address what is causing of the problem: Wealth inequality in America. Sure, it would probably go a long way to solving "normal" crime, including gang violence. But the Las Vegas shooter in particular was loaded. Wealth inequality had nothing to do with it.
 
lobosrul5 said:
I'll never agree to a solution that is: the media just needs to stop reporting on this ****. Maybe not saying the shooters name? OK.

Rather than address the mass shooter address what is causing of the problem: Wealth inequality in America. Sure, it would probably go a long way to solving "normal" crime, including gang violence. But the Las Vegas shooter in particular was loaded. Wealth inequality had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

Ya wealth inequality did have a lot to do with it. Every adult in this country is frustrated and depressed because of how difficult it is to get by much less get ahead. That anger and frustration leads directly to violence in my opinion.
 
Coveny said:
Ya wealth inequality did have a lot to do with it. Every adult in this country is frustrated and depressed because of how difficult it is to get by much less get ahead. That anger and frustration leads directly to violence in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Not in the one you are referring to though - it was nicely explained the **** was wealthy so was not acting out of hating to be in poverty.
 
Coveny said:
We see the perp in these reports much more than the victims.
Click to expand...

I read and watched a fair bit of coverage of this, and they covered the victims much more than the shooters, especially in the immediate after. Interviews with witnesses and friends and relatives of victims get a lot of airtime and wordspace, more than coverage of the shooter. later on, the wounded that survived will be giving interviews as well.

Once time has passed, they cover any trials that might occur or reports that might describe the motivations and planning of the shooters. At that point there may be coverage of the shooters.

Of course, the shooters will usually get much more coverage than any one of their victims, but that is to expected in cases where there are one or two shooters and dozens of victims.


Perhaps if we want the news to stop reporting it, we can also ask the firearms retailer to stop selling the sorts of weapons used by the shooters, at least for a good bit of time. Mass shootings are big ratings for news outlets, but they are also big sales drivers for gun manufactures, especially for the weapon type used by that shooter. Mass shootings are enormously profitable for gun manufacturers and retailers.
 
Drop the Dead Donkey

We wanted to call it Dead Belgians Don’t Count, but Channel 4 got cold feet. I think they were worried about selling it to Belgium. Then, for a while, it was called Dead Kuwaitis Don’t Count. Deciding against that was a lucky escape as, by complete chance, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait the first week it went out, in August 1990.

We came up with Drop the Dead Donkey after doing some research at BBC News. Someone had been shot in Northern Ireland – a terrible story, but there was no information. Eventually, this news editor said: “Well, if the guy’s dead, he’s in the bulletin.” That’s the way it works. But where the donkey came from, I still don’t know. I’ve heard journalists swear it’s authentic – that “donkey” refers to the cute animal story at the end of the running order. But the reality is it just sounded good.
 
Duno about the mass media, but this forum sure loves them.
 
Coveny said:
Ya wealth inequality did have a lot to do with it. Every adult in this country is frustrated and depressed because of how difficult it is to get by much less get ahead. That anger and frustration leads directly to violence in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Uh by loaded, I meant he was a multi millionaire. How did that cause him anger and resentment exactly :confused:
 
Media stops reporting rampage killings...

Conspiracy theorists go insane.







And they probably wouldn't be wrong for freaking out either.
 
IIIClovisIII said:
Media stops reporting rampage killings...

Conspiracy theorists go insane.







And they probably wouldn't be wrong for freaking out either.
Click to expand...

what if they just don't name him? leave him faceless and nameless, a looser
to the end.
in toronto the media do not report people jumping in front of subway trains
because it causes others to follow. is such a policy on mass murder not
worth a try.
 
Coveny said:
.......Rather than address the mass shooter address what is causing of the problem: Wealth inequality in America. Rather than giving the rich huge tax cuts and killing 100’s thousands in other countries because the military complex desires us to do it. Make it so our education system is funded so we can be more competitive with other countries in our education. Make it so our health care is funded so the families don’t stress about getting the treatment they need. Make it so that both parents don’t have to work two jobs just to afford to pay the bills and have the money needed for their children. Make it so that the 60+ thousand veterans are no longer homeless. Make it so that the 40+ million who are food-insecure in this country can stop worrying about where (and if) their next meal is coming from. Make it so that young people can see a bright future again in this country........
Click to expand...

So you'd give a free run to school shooters and pump a whole lot of money into middle America. That's your solution? Seems a little illogical to me, but hey, I don't live there.

From the outside it would seem that most countries would have a go at solving all their problems, not just pick the occasional one here and there whilst chucking the other one (you know, the one in which kids get murdered in school) into the "too hard" box.
 
Basically...

THe ratings folks may or may not. The actual reporters usually hate this kind of story.
 
EHocking said:
We wanted to call it Dead Belgians Don’t Count, but Channel 4 got cold feet. I think they were worried about selling it to Belgium. Then, for a while, it was called Dead Kuwaitis Don’t Count. Deciding against that was a lucky escape as, by complete chance, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait the first week it went out, in August 1990.

We came up with Drop the Dead Donkey after doing some research at BBC News. Someone had been shot in Northern Ireland – a terrible story, but there was no information. Eventually, this news editor said: “Well, if the guy’s dead, he’s in the bulletin.” That’s the way it works. But where the donkey came from, I still don’t know. I’ve heard journalists swear it’s authentic – that “donkey” refers to the cute animal story at the end of the running order. But the reality is it just sounded good.
Click to expand...


Is that quoting Andy Hamilton? It's a great program, I'm actually rewatching it for the nth time at the moment. I particularly like the episode with Henry's nephew, the points he raises about the way language is used to make otherwise balanced reporting favour one side stuck has always with me. I have the full series on DVD but it's all avaliable on All4.

What on earth happened to Channel 4??? :(:(:(
 
fritznien said:
what if they just don't name him? leave him faceless and nameless, a looser
to the end.
in toronto the media do not report people jumping in front of subway trains
because it causes others to follow. is such a policy on mass murder not
worth a try.
Click to expand...

Something like that is what I'm looking for.
 
MikeG said:
So you'd give a free run to school shooters and pump a whole lot of money into middle America. That's your solution? Seems a little illogical to me, but hey, I don't live there.

From the outside it would seem that most countries would have a go at solving all their problems, not just pick the occasional one here and there whilst chucking the other one (you know, the one in which kids get murdered in school) into the "too hard" box.
Click to expand...

:shocked:Strawman alert:shocked:
 
mgidm86 said:
This again. That's the stupidest thing I've read here in three days. Maybe more.
Click to expand...

Yes because 100s of millions of people struggling to make ends meet stressed out and worrying about "losing everything" isn't conducive to violence in the least, and other countries that have nearly as high of gun ownership as the U.S. but have global record setting instances of low murder, rape, etc aren't the point at all are they? It's stupid to think that their low rates of wealth inequality, welfare systems, universal health care, etc have anything to do with the reason why the don't have higher rates of murder, rape, etc even though they have higher rates of gun ownership. /sarcasm off :boggled:
 
Coveny said:
Yes because 100s of millions of people struggling to make ends meet stressed out and worrying about "losing everything" isn't conducive to violence in the least, and other countries that have nearly as high of gun ownership as the U.S. but have global record setting instances of low murder, rape, etc aren't the point at all are they? It's stupid to think that their low rates of wealth inequality, welfare systems, universal health care, etc have anything to do with the reason why the don't have higher rates of murder, rape, etc even though they have higher rates of gun ownership. /sarcasm off :boggled:
Click to expand...

I think you are conflating the causes of mass shootings with the caused of murder in general.

Handguns/pistols kill a lot more people than rifles, most handgun murders are committed by people well known to the victims. Your concerns about wealth and inequality are pretty valid regarding that sort of murder.

Mass shootings are different beast. The victims often didn't know or barely knew the shooters, semi-auto rifles are the weapon of choice. Mass shooters are often not poverty stricken; the Vegas shooter was fairly wealthy, the Florida shooter would have inherited about 1/2 million dollars if he hadn't done this.

Both issues need to be addressed. But the things that make one less common may have little impact on the other.
 
crescent said:
I read and watched a fair bit of coverage of this, and they covered the victims much more than the shooters, especially in the immediate after.
Click to expand...
Are you here in the United States? Your experience doesn't match mine.



crescent said:
Both issues need to be addressed. But the things that make one less common may have little impact on the other.
Click to expand...
Do you have any evidence supporting your conclusions here? You said "may have little impact" but until we actually do something about it, we'll never know. So why not try it and find out?

Besides, even if it's granted that reducing poverty won't reduce mass shootings, how much money and effort should be made to reduce something which is extremely statistically unlikely in the first place?
 
The Norseman said:
Are you here in the United States? Your experience doesn't match mine.




Do you have any evidence supporting your conclusions here? You said "may have little impact" but until we actually do something about it, we'll never know. So why not try it and find out?

Besides, even if it's granted that reducing poverty won't reduce mass shootings, how much money and effort should be made to reduce something which is extremely statistically unlikely in the first place?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm American. I live in Colorado. I get my news from CNN (mostly off the website), ABCNews (again of the website), Denver Post (web, not hardcopy) BBC, Slate, Salon, The Atlantic, and Mother Jones.

You seem to not understanding my position. I am strongly in favor of increased regulation of firearms. Universal background checks, registration, red flag holds, limits on magazine capacity, and more. I think I am one of the most outspoken people on the forum in that regard.

I see wealth inequity as a huge issue. I think it is a complicated one, as it is very international in scope.
 
P.J. Denyer said:
Is that quoting Andy Hamilton? It's a great program, I'm actually rewatching it for the nth time at the moment. I particularly like the episode with Henry's nephew, the points he raises about the way language is used to make otherwise balanced reporting favour one side stuck has always with me. I have the full series on DVD but it's all avaliable on All4.

What on earth happened to Channel 4??? :(:(:(
Click to expand...
On a tablet so getting linkies a chore.
Interview with Andy Hamilton
 
fritznien said:
what if they just don't name him? leave him faceless and nameless, a looser
to the end.
in toronto the media do not report people jumping in front of subway trains
because it causes others to follow. is such a policy on mass murder not
worth a try.
Click to expand...


In the case of a spree killing, you're much less likely to get news organisations to keep quiet about them. They could just report the facts, concentrate on the victims and give no time to the shooter but they tend to want to investigate these events and that leads to an emphasis on the perpetrators rather than the victims. The victims are usually random so nothing can be learned about the event from examining them.
 
crescent said:
I think you are conflating the causes of mass shootings with the caused of murder in general.

Handguns/pistols kill a lot more people than rifles, most handgun murders are committed by people well known to the victims. Your concerns about wealth and inequality are pretty valid regarding that sort of murder.

Mass shootings are different beast. The victims often didn't know or barely knew the shooters, semi-auto rifles are the weapon of choice. Mass shooters are often not poverty stricken; the Vegas shooter was fairly wealthy, the Florida shooter would have inherited about 1/2 million dollars if he hadn't done this.

Both issues need to be addressed. But the things that make one less common may have little impact on the other.
Click to expand...

First off 1/2 million dollars is not rich in this country. It's enough to give you a head start getting there but it's not enough to retire on. It's not "fairly wealthy". Here is a link on the topic that will sadden you.
https://esimoney.com/3-million-not-enough-retire/

You say I'm combining issues but look at the shooters you mentioned "white supremacists". They are the gold standard of people who feel like they aren't getting what they deserve from the world. And how are they converted again?
https://cathyreisenwitz.com/demographic-economic-reasons-expect-violent-white-supremacy/
 
Coveny said:
First off 1/2 million dollars is not rich in this country. It's enough to give you a head start getting there but it's not enough to retire on. It's not "fairly wealthy". Here is a link on the topic that will sadden you.
https://esimoney.com/3-million-not-enough-retire/
Click to expand...

I did not say the Florida shooter was wealthy. I said that mass shooters in general have not been poverty stricken. I stated that the Las Vegas shooter was wealthy, and I stated that the Florida shooter stood to inherit a good bit of money - but I did not say that made him wealthy. I was an example to show that he was not poverty stricken. He was middle class, not poor. Many mass shooters have been middle class, most of them I think.

You say I'm combining issues but look at the shooters you mentioned "white supremacists". They are the gold standard of people who feel like they aren't getting what they deserve from the world. And how are they converted again?
https://cathyreisenwitz.com/demographic-economic-reasons-expect-violent-white-supremacy/
Click to expand...

I said nothing at all about white supremacy, with or without quotation marks.

If you are trying to suggest that economic inequality is a force or condition driving people into, or encouraging the drift into white supremacy, then you might have a point.

Then again, putting quotation marks around "white supremacy" despite the fact that I made not the slightest mention of it makes me wonder what point you are trying to get across. Were those Scare Quotes?
 
crescent said:
I did not say the Florida shooter was wealthy. I said that mass shooters in general have not been poverty stricken. I stated that the Las Vegas shooter was wealthy, and I stated that the Florida shooter stood to inherit a good bit of money - but I did not say that made him wealthy. I was an example to show that he was not poverty stricken. He was middle class, not poor. Many mass shooters have been middle class, most of them I think.



I said nothing at all about white supremacy, with or without quotation marks.

If you are trying to suggest that economic inequality is a force or condition driving people into, or encouraging the drift into white supremacy, then you might have a point.

Then again, putting quotation marks around "white supremacy" despite the fact that I made not the slightest mention of it makes me wonder what point you are trying to get across. Were those Scare Quotes?
Click to expand...

Where did I claim you said the florida shooter was wealthy? You stated the Las Vegas shooter was fairly wealthy. It's my understanding he was worth less than half a million. Is that not true?

I can only assume I got this confused with another post sorry about the white supremacy comment. Really not sure how I got the first half right and then messed up the back half must have gotten distracted or something. meh
 
Coveny said:
Where did I claim you said the florida shooter was wealthy? You stated the Las Vegas shooter was fairly wealthy. It's my understanding he was worth less than half a million. Is that not true?

(snip)
Click to expand...

This story says his estate is worth about five million dollars. I'd consider that wealthy, but then I'm not wealthy myself.
 
crescent said:
Yes, I'm American. I live in Colorado. I get my news from CNN (mostly off the website), ABCNews (again of the website), Denver Post (web, not hardcopy) BBC, Slate, Salon, The Atlantic, and Mother Jones.

You seem to not understanding my position. I am strongly in favor of increased regulation of firearms. Universal background checks, registration, red flag holds, limits on magazine capacity, and more. I think I am one of the most outspoken people on the forum in that regard.

I see wealth inequity as a huge issue. I think it is a complicated one, as it is very international in scope.
Click to expand...
You may have read it, but I recommend reading the book The Spirit Level where the author concludes that wealth inequality is a driver of high crime and violence in a country and apparently there is a very strong causal relationship. His numbers seem to bear this out; it's not simply an error or even a correlational relationship.

I also tend to read and get news from those sources but now that I think back, I have been avoiding this last shooting for personal reasons and I'm going by what I recall from earlier mass shooting events, so I could be very much mistaken.
 
fritznien said:
what if they just don't name him? leave him faceless and nameless, a looser
to the end.
in toronto the media do not report people jumping in front of subway trains
because it causes others to follow. is such a policy on mass murder not
worth a try.
Click to expand...

What if victims and media demand to know the perp, how he gathered the weapons, what the purpose of the attack was, etc. There's just too many questions that will be asked regardless.

It may answer whether the cause is terrorism, insanity, murder-suicide, etc
 
Welcome to the world of irrelevant distractions. Anyone claiming the media love mass shootings is pretty obviously attempting to shift attention and blame. Even if we assume that they do love mass shootings (an assumption that requires members of the media to be sociopaths), it has ****-all to do with the reasons these shootings take place.

There are some who want mass murders with guns to get less media attention because they're uncomfortable justifying their positions on gun laws. My response is that if you're uncomfortable defending your positions, it's probably time to consider changing them.
 
Gun owners love mass shootings, it lets them know which guns to buy. Best advertisements there can be. What they apparently hate is the fake mainstream media.
 
Babbylonian said:
Welcome to the world of irrelevant distractions. Anyone claiming the media love mass shootings is pretty obviously attempting to shift attention and blame. Even if we assume that they do love mass shootings (an assumption that requires members of the media to be sociopaths), it has ****-all to do with the reasons these shootings take place.
Click to expand...

"If it bleeds, it leads."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom