shakran

It was a shooting. It happened in a school. Ergo. . .


I'm sorry that you have chosen to narrowly define school shooting as a shooting that happens in a school and which must be executed only by a member of that school.

We in the media define a school shooting as a shooting that happens in a school, no matter who carries it out.

Kind of like when we report on a highway shooting, it is not required that a highway department worker be the one pulling the trigger.

And why would you bring up the ratings crap? #1 it's not a ratings period - that's next month, so unless today's coverage will impress the viewer enough that he starts watching your station repeatedly, especially in November, February, May, and July . . . . #2 unless you are somehow implying that there is a vast media conspiracy to goad people into shooting up schools just so we can get ratings, your accusations are groundless. It happened, it's news, we report it. Period. Will the ratings go up? Maybe, but to be honest I can't see too many people watching the inane babble on the cablenets today. To be quite frank, many journalists have forgotten how to be journalists and instead spend their time breathlessly reporting every little rumor that crosses the desk whether its confirmed or not (6 dead! 7 dead! no wait 4 dead! OK now we're really sure this time, it's 3 dead!). I don't think the general public is stupid enough to be impressed by this, so I don't think it will translate into higher ratings come November.


With all the real problems the media, and especially the broadcast media, has, I would hope you would concentrate on them rather than inventing new ones.

Everything OK over there Analog? You've been somewhat unusually combative in the crime/death threads lately.