I did not hear that. If that is the case their parents should have shielded them they are underage.
The point I was trying to make is that the media does exploit this heartstring to create drama that keeps people watching. If anything is worth watching it is the search for a missing child. Maybe somone watching might be able to help. That would be a good thing.
I do not find fault with this action of the media.
When people do watch, some need their own sense of closure because they do become attached over time. Without that, the feeling of being left hanging is unavoidable. Next time a story comes up a person may just turn it off, they do not want go go thru that attachment again only to be left wondering. What if that was the person that had seen the trailor hitch or the white truck? See what I mean?
Follow up can be handled by the police, parents and others. I believe the children should always be left out. With the fights, what I think is newsworthy is that assualt, even mob action assault, is trending toward entertainment. Not even something to prosecute. SO much for the rule of law. Example after example where law is not enforced, I would say that the softening of our country on the fabric level is quite newsworthy.
It is only entertainment on My Space and the likes. Those beaten up should prosecute plain and simple. That is the crime.
Elimination of personal responsibility is where that trend started. Leftist zealots making excuses for why someone did something instead of just looking at what was done and seeing it for what it is. Assigning personal responsibility to each who own it and using that information to assign guilt (read:blame) in order to impose proper punishment.
In the case today, the parents were not interested in prosecuting. That is their business and the story should have ended there. There was no story except what ever someone wanted to create.
The media keeps harping about stuff appearing on the internet. So what! The internet is not at fault. Supposedly, we have freedom of speech. If anything, it is the juveniles commiting the type of crimes (assault). I believe the media has an agenda to limit the internet and we will have another nanny cause. I may not like what is on the internet but it is my responsibility as a parent to monitor it not the government's place to tell me what I can or cannot see on the internet. The latter is the direction I believe this is leading.
The step father said that he thought it was best left up to the boy. It has been said here that he was lorded over by his captor, I would agree with that most likely being true.
Allowing the boy to make the choice empowers him towards his own decisions does it not? Shielding him away against his will could have been harmful in that it would seem like more of the same to him. I would have to agree with you in one area, as a minor the parents are the ultimate authority.
Is it possible that leaving children out can augment the problems we see today? I wonder if shielding kids from reality is always the best thing to show them. Would it not be proper to say that they could, and do, grow up thinking that being shielded from reality is right and proper well into adulthood? Is this not a problem associated with the views taken by the leftist of liberals? Don't they live in that very shielded from reality world?
When an unwilling participant is getting beat up and it is perceived as entertainment we indeed have problems in our society. I admit I am guilty of watching videos of that nature and considering them entertainment. Posed to me in the way you did, made me think, thanks. I have a bit of a different view right now than I had before talking with you. I see a line between willing and unwilling participants.
I am in agreement with what you had to say about the internet. If the media is attempting to dissuade people from it, or making attempt to control it, then they are fighting a truly senseless battle.