Giving killers media attention

[KingsGambit]

I was watching the 3 am CBS national newscast in my breakroom this morning, and they had a psychology professor from St. John's University on there to talk about the shooting in Virginia. He noted how the shooter made reference to other mass shooters in the past in his "manifesto", and said that the desire for media attention and getting your name and face out there is one of the big influences in getting on there. The professor basically told the interviewer that the media may not have the courage to stop chasing ratings and stop publicizing these names and faces, because the coverage is a reward for them.

This was interesting, but blaming the media seems too convenient. After all, the media only reports what people want to know, and people are always fascinated by info on the shooters and trying to get inside their heads. Even if the media started self censoring, the information would still get out (where I live, you can check local arrest records on the sheriff's website; my county had the info up on the Jewish Community Center shooter shortly after the incident last year, and people talk on social media.) So honestly I'm not sure if there is a solution here.

[Darth Executor]

I don't think the media does it purely for ratings, it's also ideological. Every shooting is spun in a way convenient to progressives.

[MaxVel]

I thought this thread should have been titled:

"Giving Media killer attention"

[Catholicity]

I don't think the media does it purely for ratings, it's also ideological. Every shooting is spun in a way convenient to progressives.

I would have to agree here. There was some sort of IDiscovery recently put on Netflix called "The Killer Speaks" where they interview and give a first person account of a crime from the murderer's point of view. In more than a few ways I think this is wrong. Rarely is a lifetime convict of first degree murder actually wrongfully convicted especially with modern forensics. Most of the murderers on the series were "thrill killers." Giving them a voice as opposed to anything but death or life behind bars in silence is injustice to the victims. Just a few were potentially self defense and convicted as 2nd degree or lesser crimes. Honest to goodness it made me sick just watching the few I did. And it really followed the Progressive Idea of No death penalty and attempted to make a person "understand a socio/psychopath" I still don't, I don't want to, and I hope I never do. People who are thrill killers do not need to live and tax payer money does not need to support them

[rogue06]

Ever since Columbine I've been warning that all the attention given to the killers and all the public angst spent trying to "understand" them would lead to more such acts. Deranged misfits with violent inclination would see it and think that this was a legitimate way to get people to listen to them. Denying them publicity might even be just enough to keep a couple from deciding them to emulate such acts. Leave it to the psychiatrists and the like to figure out their motives and stop turning them into role models for psychopaths.