no funnies, but some thoughts.
i, for one, got absolutely nothing done at work yesterday, mostly because i was obsessing over all the latest news tidbits coming out about the virginia tech shooting. did anyone else (especially those that followed the news closely like i did), find the incessant need to talk to and be near people, whether it be online over IM or to co-workers next door. as the day wore along, i felt increasingly uncomfortable being alone.
and here's something that landed in my inbox from poynter (journalism ethics org) about some of the coverage of the shootings. i'm sure there will be plenty more commentary on how the press is handling the situation, but this addresses one of the major problems i've seen in the past 24 hours. i haven't decided who yet is to "blame" here, but the university's response didn't strike me completely incompetent or out of line. we'll have to wait and see. i can't imagine what it's like for the school officials who will forever be plagued by the "what if."
Poynteronline
Everyday Ethics
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Posted by Kelly McBride 11:00:16 AM
Culture of Blame:
Ask the Right Questions of the Right People
Journalists have an obligation to be watchdogs, to question authority and hold the powerful accountable. To that end, the journalists covering the Virginia Tech Massacre should ask if the authorities responded appropriately when they allowed the campus to remain open after the first two murders.
RELATED RESOURCES
To receive "Everyday Ethics" by e-mail, sign up here. Newsletters are delivered as new items are added.
But asking every student on campus and every John Doe on the street his or her opinion on whether the school should have been locked down is not watchdog journalism. It’s seeding doubt without evidence. It’s planting distrust in the authorities without any indication of malfeasance. It’s answering the question by asking it.
Yes, grill the university president and his administration on this point. That’s appropriate. Delve into the state of mind of the police unraveling the first two killings. That’s investigative journalism. Ask other experts what questions and information the police and the college leadership should have been seeking between the discovery of the first slaughter and beginning of the second. That’s providing the audience with context and holding officials accountable for their actions. Because it is possible that if police dismissed the first two deaths as merely domestic violence, they missed important clues that could have prevented the next 30 deaths. It’s a legitimate question when asked in a setting where it can be analyzed and answered.
But don’t ask witnesses who’ve had to run for their lives. Don’t ask distraught parents. Don’t throw the question into the fray, just to see where it will stick. That’s the tactic of loudmouth shock jocks, not journalists trying to help a nation make sense of a tragedy. When asked repeatedly, of every single person interviewed, that question does nothing to promote accountability and instead becomes an agent of blame, a spark intended to ignite anger as a response to grief.
Questions are powerful tools. But they have to be applied with precision and accuracy. Asked at the wrong time, of the wrong person, a question can become a weapon that causes great harm without achieving any good.
and here's something that landed in my inbox from poynter (journalism ethics org) about some of the coverage of the shootings. i'm sure there will be plenty more commentary on how the press is handling the situation, but this addresses one of the major problems i've seen in the past 24 hours. i haven't decided who yet is to "blame" here, but the university's response didn't strike me completely incompetent or out of line. we'll have to wait and see. i can't imagine what it's like for the school officials who will forever be plagued by the "what if."
Poynteronline
Everyday Ethics
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Posted by Kelly McBride 11:00:16 AM
Culture of Blame:
Ask the Right Questions of the Right People
Journalists have an obligation to be watchdogs, to question authority and hold the powerful accountable. To that end, the journalists covering the Virginia Tech Massacre should ask if the authorities responded appropriately when they allowed the campus to remain open after the first two murders.
RELATED RESOURCES
To receive "Everyday Ethics" by e-mail, sign up here. Newsletters are delivered as new items are added.
But asking every student on campus and every John Doe on the street his or her opinion on whether the school should have been locked down is not watchdog journalism. It’s seeding doubt without evidence. It’s planting distrust in the authorities without any indication of malfeasance. It’s answering the question by asking it.
Yes, grill the university president and his administration on this point. That’s appropriate. Delve into the state of mind of the police unraveling the first two killings. That’s investigative journalism. Ask other experts what questions and information the police and the college leadership should have been seeking between the discovery of the first slaughter and beginning of the second. That’s providing the audience with context and holding officials accountable for their actions. Because it is possible that if police dismissed the first two deaths as merely domestic violence, they missed important clues that could have prevented the next 30 deaths. It’s a legitimate question when asked in a setting where it can be analyzed and answered.
But don’t ask witnesses who’ve had to run for their lives. Don’t ask distraught parents. Don’t throw the question into the fray, just to see where it will stick. That’s the tactic of loudmouth shock jocks, not journalists trying to help a nation make sense of a tragedy. When asked repeatedly, of every single person interviewed, that question does nothing to promote accountability and instead becomes an agent of blame, a spark intended to ignite anger as a response to grief.
Questions are powerful tools. But they have to be applied with precision and accuracy. Asked at the wrong time, of the wrong person, a question can become a weapon that causes great harm without achieving any good.
posted by alison at 11:24
1 Comments:
yeah, i especially did not want to be alone and couldn't take my eyes off of FoxNews (evil right-wing news conglomerate! yet so dramatic and exciting...).
i also agree that maybe it's not so smart to throw in the idea of "appropriate response" (although why wasn't there a lockdown?) before people have properly grieved and recovered. watching the interviews of so-called heroes was excrutiating b/c these people were just acting to survive, there was no elaborate thought process that the media so desire to hear about. i admit, i wonder, what would i do? but i hope it never comes to that.
what a diatribe.
Post a Comment
<< Home