[rellimpank]

--this should be tattooed on the eyeballs of some print and TV executives--

[GOPJ]

... if a fan runs onto the field during a baseball game, the broadcast cameras usually avoid showing pictures of the fan. The TV producers know that the fan on the field is seeking attention, and that, presumably, getting his picture on television will reward him. Moreover, broadcasting the man's antics would encourage copycats. Killing time at a baseball game is a tiny misdeed, compared to killing people, but many media decisions have the effect of encouraging copycat murders.

Sick, but true.

[The_Media_never_lie]

I do not like guns.

However, I an considering a concealed carry permit and buying a pistol so that, should I have the misfortune to come accross such a scene, I could end it like the lady in Colorado.

[PackerBronco]

If I were in charge of the media, I would institute the same rule for hiding the name of mass killers as is commonly used to shield the name of rape victims. I would replace the name of murderer with "another friggin' murdering bastard" and instead of showing the guy's photo, I would show the same generic photo of some ugly baboon. Thus my articles would ALWAYS read like the following:

In Omaha today, another friggin' murdering bastard opened fire in a shopping mall

[marktwain]

This is common sense, but the brain dead MSM will deny, deny, deny because it makes them more involved in promoting the mass shootings than all the gun manufacturers in the world.

[marktwain]

The MSM promotes their profit line at the expense of the victims of mass murderers.

You don’t see any gun manufacturers using these mass murderers as their poster boys.

[Atlas Sneezed]

This all presumes that the media DOESN’T want more mass murders they can use to sell soap, along with their anti-gun leftist agenda.

Honestly, I believe that a federal prohibition on revealing such information would NOT violate the first amendment (for public safety reasons.) I may be wrong, but some enterprising Congressman seeking to get some national attention could introduce such a bill, and start the dialogue (”voluntary” media standards might result.)

[Malsua]

In one of the Second Foundation books, the emperor decries exactly this. The names and faces of troublemakers are forever stricken from the public record. They are assigned a number.

It’s fiction of course, but the premise is accurate. Copycats were sowing chaos to get famous. They simply disappeared forever. It’s a great idea.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

“It used to be that the local radio and TV stations were owned by the mom-and-pop organizations; these private family-owned media companies usually were from the community. So they had a vested interest in the community, their kids went to the schools, they went to the churches, they were very concerned about the community. That’s not the case any more.

Most of these stations are owned by huge conglomerates, these media companies such as Infinity or Clear Channel. Basically, they own everything. They’re not looking at it as an individual community, they’re looking at it as part of their bigger picture, what the bottom line is.

There’s a lot of pressure on local managers—whether it be the news director or general manager of a TV station, or the program director of a radio station—to really meet those bottom-line requests. Often, what they’re forced to do is to do much more with much less. And that’s why you see so much of the lowest common denominator, so much crime, so much quick and easy coverage.

Crime is extremely cheap and extremely easy to cover, especially in a big city like Detroit or in New York or in Chicago, where all you have to do is look out your window and you can find a fire or a murder or a shooting, and it doesn’t take a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter to cover any of that stuff. They simply show up with a camera, put the mast up on the live truck, they shoot the video, they shoot the cop cars, they talk to the victims, they get the screaming parents and stick the microphone in their faces—it’s not that difficult to cover, and there’s a plethora of that stuff out there.

And you can milk it all day long. You can do teases, you can do live shots, you can do tape stories. They’re doing as much as they can with the little they have, because there’s so much pressure now on TV and radio stations to meet that bottom line.

There was a survey that came out about two years ago that was done by a national consulting firm, that showed that local TV stations, in terms of news, were hemorrhaging viewers. They are just losing viewers left and right. Most of the people just don’t find anything that means anything to them on local news, because they’re not really covering the community.

Yes, there should be a certain amount of crime coverage, when stories are very serious, and you want to know what’s going on in your community, but you don’t need to cover every car accident and every fire and every shooting. People get tired of that because it doesn’t pertain to them.

So they want to see more coverage on school issues, on tax issues, on faith issues, on medical issues, but they’re not getting it from the local news. So they’ll go to a network news source, or they’ll go to the Internet, or they’ll read the paper. But local news [on TV] has just died in the last few years in terms of losing viewers and ratings.

---

http://www.moralityinmedia.org/index.htm?mediaIssues/vilewwf.htm

Teresa Tomeo: ‘Turn off your TV and tell the media why’ (interview excerpt) — published on MoralityInMedia.org website long ago...

---