4.18.2007

Violence in Virginia

I followed the awful situation at Virginia tech all day Monday, updating my Internet browser often while I was working on GM'07 to see if they got the killer, to see who it was. And it's true that I was glad to have the media outlets on the Internet as a resource; since the ex moved out and took the cable cord with him, I haven't been able to watch TV, so I'm obliged to the old Internet for all my news.

This morning I checked several news sites, as I normally do when I wake up, and watched a few videos on CNN. The shit really made my stomach turn, and by that, I'm not referring to the tragedy (which was obviously horrible and unbelievable), but by the way the so-called journalists were SO. OBVIOUSLY. BIASED. Wolf Blitzer and Paula Zahn, among other assholes, kept trying to make this a black and white story. The reporter who interviewed the killer's roommates would have been thrown out of court with the leading questions he was asking. It was clear to me that the killer was a loner-type of kid, who had many social and psychological issues- but you cannot say something like "Blah blah never mentioned his roommate's problems to his family; being the good son he is, he didn't want to worry them." Why throw in "the good son he is"? How is this at all relevant to understanding the story? And how could you have graduated from a journalism program with this kind of story painting?

It was slimy to watch them label people heroes for doing their jobs (i.e. English teacher reporting the killer's writings to the counseling center). I understand people are grieving and I'll say it again: what happened Monday was something that should never have happened and it's awful that it wasn't prevented. But you can't start making a journalistic fairytale like this; you can't label people good guys and bad guys- because the world isn't like that, as much as George W. and the media like to pretend it is.

My thoughts are with those who lost friends and family members Monday. I don't personally know anyone affected (at least not that I've heard of yet). And I'd like to know more about the situation, as anyone would. But boy, has our media lost my entire confidence in its ability to professionally report the news.

Feel free to leave comments about sources of good, unbiased news that you've found and appreciate.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I too often wonder how "journalists" were ever able to graduate... and I'm worried that maybe they're taught to write like that (and that's why, if I ever get onto a journalism programme, I'll bravely put on a fight!)

Along the same lines as your example: I was appalled to hear how they covered the murder of a young girl in Nantes: the suspect was systematically described as being "of Bosnian origin" - how is that relevant, for God's sake? Or maybe it's because Bosnians have it in their genes to murder women... that's probably what one of our presidential candidates thinks anyway!

Bises,
Emilie

Matt said...

I too was taken a little aback when the media kept calling them heros. They aren't heros, they are victims, victims of a horrible event.

ev said...

i tried watching fox news for a bit last night because it was the only channel at the time that was covering the story, and i could only deal with it for 10 mins because it was...well, fox. yuck.