2112

The day after Columbine, I was interviewed for the Tom Brokaw news program. The reporter had been assigned a theory and was seeking sound bites to support it. “Wouldn’t you say,” she asked, “that killings like this are influenced by violent movies?” No, I said, I wouldn’t say that. “But what about Basketball Diaries?” she asked. “Doesn’t that have a scene of a boy walking into a school with a machine gun?” The obscure 1995 Leonardo Di Caprio movie did indeed have a brief fantasy scene of that nature, I said, but the movie failed at the box office (it grossed only $2.5 million), and it’s unlikely the Columbine killers saw it. The reporter looked disappointed, so I offered her my theory. “Events like this,” I said, “if they are influenced by anything, are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event. Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia. The message is clear to other disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see they shouldn’t have messed with me. I’ll go out in a blaze of glory.” In short, I said, events like Columbine are influenced far less by violent movies than by CNN, the NBC Nightly News and all the other news media, who glorify the killers in the guise of “explaining” them. I commended the policy at the Sun-Times, where our editor said the paper would no longer feature school killings on Page 1. The reporter thanked me and turned off the camera. Of course the interview was never used. They found plenty of talking heads to condemn violent movies, and everybody was happy.

Roger Ebert

Yes. Plain and simple.

However, I don’t know exactly where a news outlet’s coverage should begin and end. Perhaps if those front page, prime-time features were more balanced with ‘positive’ stories, the incentive to achieve recognition through violence would be mitigated? Even that though leaves the underachievers - those self labeled as worthless or not having accomplished anything of note - unrecognized and with the ‘not good enough’ feeling. I would challenge the media, which as an industry is most talented at shaping public opinion and what is being discussed on whole, to figure out a better way to wield that power for good.

I don’t know the ‘right’ answer, but I am sick over senseless violence and saddened that blame is thrown at entertainment instead of communities, media, and education. And, is it possible that no matter what society does, some individuals will just never understand right from wrong?

What are your thoughts?

(via jenbokoff)

Source: ibad