Posted on 08/29/2015 11:26:56 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
NEW YORK — In an era when anyone can go online and find video of extremist beheadings, police shootings and other carnage, major news organizations applied their own standards to coverage of this week’s killing of a TV news crew in Virginia and showed only carefully selected portions of the footage.
They were difficult newsroom decisions, informed by competitive pressures, questions of newsworthiness and taste, and an understanding that for all the talk about the great convergence of media, a fundamental difference still exists between TV and the Internet.
“We went back and forth on this — whether to run it, not run it, or just use frame grabs,” said Al Ortiz, CBS vice president of standards and practices. “It’s not a decision you make lightly. An argument was made that we were doing the gunman’s work for him. But the decision we came around to was that it was editorially important to show how methodical, planned and deliberate this was. That’s the only reason we used it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at limaohio.com ...
I wonder if they would have questioned the “newsworthiness” of this story if the shooter was white and the victims black?
Every now and then some texting teenager crosses the center line and kills a couple of people. I still drive to work and just drive defensively - as I always have.
I also still take showers in the tub even though people fall and die all the time doing that.
i.e. people worry too much.
This is the only way these clowns will ever be noticed.
NCIS had an episode in which a terrorist was going to blow up a bus. Of course they caught him, but the twist was that they only released to the press that he had been caught and his name was being withheld as part of an investigation or such. This terrorist was big on being famous. It was only a TV show, but it was a bummer for the bomber and it made a point.
Take away the notoriety and you might take away a lot of the motivation.
Yep, the tough media decision revolves around the fact that their perpetrator is black and a homosexual. He’s a member of two recognized grievance groups.
So this event doesn’t fit the media template for being a hate crime. The tough decisions they have to make are how to cover the story, when if they are intellectually honest, they would have to say it was a racially motivated hate crime.
Since the media are liberal, it’s hard for them to get their arms around a reverse racist story.
Yes, it’s really tough on the Democrat media when the killer of two outstanding young White people was a racist homosexual Black television reporter.
In a since the shooter was of the medias own making.
Agreed.
If the shooter were white and he shot two black media people, this story would be covered as a racist hate crime, as the Charleston church shootings were covered.
But the media are flummoxed here, because they have no template to cover a racist hate crime committed by blacks against whites.
A local station here (Washington) refused to show a picture of the shooter, speak his name or discuss his motive other than to say he was a disgruntled ex employee. It’s station that blacked out the IRS scandal, Ben Ghazi and Anthony Gruber completely.
OK then...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.