|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is heavy coverage of mass shootings media overkill?
August 12, 1999
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Littleton. Atlanta. Los Angeles. The televised scenes are distressingly familiar. Guns, random violence and innocent victims. The most recent shooting on Tuesday at a Jewish Center in the Los Angeles area offered an intense breaking news story, with wounded children, panicky parents and a massive manhunt. "You've the elements of a tremendous drama. You have a bad guy, a guy who is so bad that he's gone in and shot ... little kids," said Carl Gottlieb of the Project for Excellence in Journalism. But do the images, broadcast live and unedited across the country and much of the world, inspire others to copy what they see, or place police officers at risk? "Ninety-nine point 99 percent of the people who are watching the news are disgusted by what's happening. They're appalled. They're sickened. But there are some where the seeds are planted," said psychiatrist Dr. Robert Simmerson. Copycats could be watching, some fearThe risk of encouraging copycats "is something we're concerned about," said Sid Bedingfield, executive vice president of CNN USA. "But on the other hand, you can't not cover the story. You can try to cover it responsibly and with perspective. But I don't think it helps to ignore the story." Some viewers expressed concern that the constant, instantaneous coverage could lead to more bloodshed. "Enough is enough on this shooting coverage," said one CNN watcher who called the network Tuesday. Can't you all see this coverage is causing more and more violence?" But while the images may upset viewers, they watch in large numbers. In the immediate aftermath of the Los Angeles shootings, CNN's ratings more than tripled. "This is something that is simply natural for the cable operators to do," said Marvin Kalb, director of the Joan Shorenstein Center on Press and Politics at Harvard University. Repeated incidents of gun violence this year have made it a topic of concern to many Americans and justified the extensive coverage, said John Moody, Fox News Channel vice president for news. Could coverage put police at risk?The president of the National Information Officers Association said he was concerned that broadcasters in Los Angeles went too far when there was a chance that the suspect in the community center shooting was watching TV. "It may expose a weakness or may expose an officer to a suspect who may decide to go out in a blaze of glory," said Don Kelly, a Baton Rouge, Louisiana, police officer. Frequently during the Los Angeles coverage, the networks showed footage of police searching the neighborhood and a hotel where they believed the suspect might be hiding. Los Angeles TV reporters, in comments aired over the images, said they were taking care not to show police activity that could endanger officers. But there were discrepancies: One station said it was withholding the number of the hotel room where the gunman was mistakenly thought to be holed up, but another station reported it. Bedingfield said CNN frequently broke away from live shots that it thought might show too much. "It's tough to do," he said, "and we weren't always entirely successful." Reporter Jonathan Aiken and The Associated Press contributed to this report. RELATED STORIES: Shooting suspect returned to L.A. to face charges RELATED SITES: The Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Back to the top |
© 2001 Cable News Network. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines. |