But the problem is that it is going beyond simple reporting and going 
into the realm of explotation.  Cound the same story have been told 
without showing the videos?  Probably and while I agree that a 
reporter's job is to report on the news, I personaly feel that the 
job of the editor is to weigh and to look at all angles of a story 
and then deciede what should be done.

The problem always comes from is that you will always have people who 
want to look for answers, to understand "why" something 
happened.  "Were there clues, could we have prevented this, what's 
wrong with his parenets, why wasn't he stopped or jailed" and so on 
and so on.  

The sad fact is MOST times there are NO answers.  Life happens, (I am 
not saying that to sound cold or unfeeling, if you have seen any of 
my videos, you should know I am nothing like that)  But what I mean 
is that things will always happen that we do not understand.  
Sometimes you can gain knowledge by digging or finding out 
information but a lot of times it's just random.

Me, personaly I would not have run it.  I would have found a 
different way to tell this part of the story because even though I do 
believe you have to report the news I would like to think we can 
report the news and still have some remaing empathy.  

Heath
http://batmangeek.com


--- In [email protected], Irina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> i have sat in many editorial news meetings deciding what is going 
to go into
> a story.
> 
> NBC did its job in showing parts of the video on the news.
> it's not the reporters job to decide what's tasteful or proper
> it's not their job to protect the public or the victims from 
anything
> their only job is to tell the story as accurately and truthfully as 
possible
> 
> NBC was in its right to do this just as the families of the victims 
are
> right to
> say how much they hate NBC for doing it and for refusing to go on 
tv in
> protest.
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/19/07, Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   I must have missed the conversation on the solutions.. ;-)
> >
> > I think that it has to be more than just "citizen media" making 
the
> > changes though. For one because you will have a segment of the
> > population who does not trust "real" news people. I know most on
> > this list would find that hard to believe but it is true. But I do
> > agree the best thing we can do to "force" change is to call out
> > things like this. To not watch the programs and to stand up. Which
> > I know most if not all on this list do.....we just have to get the
> > rest of the world to change as well.... ;-)
> >
> >
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> >
> > --- In [email protected] <videoblogging%
40yahoogroups.com>,
> > Rupert <rupert@> wrote:
> > >
> > > No, I'm sure no one thinks you do agree with what they've done,
> > > Heath. Totally understand your questioning, and you're right to.
> > > You said first of all, though, that you didn't think we provided
> > > solutions, we just complained about how bad MSM was - and I 
don't
> > > think that's right - I think we talk about the solutions non-
> > stop.
> > > And, my own opinion, there are no solutions to it in the pre-
> > internet
> > > market. The solution *is* the internet and on-demand media.
> > >
> > > But now I'm repeating myself for like the twelfth time, so I'll
> > shut up.
> > >
> > > On 19 Apr 2007, at 23:34, Heath wrote:
> > >
> > > For the record I don't agree with what the MSM has done and in
> > > paticular in deceiding to air the video....I was merely wanting 
to
> > > know "how" we can change things and how "we" can make a 
differance.
> > >
> > > To be able to discuss things we have to look at multiples 
angles,
> > > talk through situtions.....I think those things are important, 
it's
> > > the only way to counter ignorance, IMO...
> > >
> > > Heath
> > > http://batmangeek.com
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected] <videoblogging%
40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "missbhavens1969"
> > > <missbhavens1969@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Absolutely positively no fucking way would I air those videos.
> > There
> > > > was no reason -- NONE -- none other than ratings and the 
thrill
> > of
> > > > exclusivity for NBC to do so. Watching them gains us nothing.
> > There
> > > is
> > > > nothing useful in them. The shooter is dead, and really, what
> > else
> > > do
> > > > we need to know? It's beyond obvious he was mentally ill, do 
we
> > need
> > > > to see video proof, too? Oh, wait. Yes we do. Because the
> > American
> > > > television audience is as voyeuristic as they come. Forget 
that
> > NBC
> > > > has played into the shooters hands. This is exactly what he
> > wanted,
> > > > and he got it. He didn't mail the box to police, he mailed it 
to
> > a
> > > > television station. Now every angry, dejected, hateful, sullen
> > kid
> > > who
> > > > dreams of blowing away the school gets to see it, too. He 
wanted
> > to
> > > be
> > > > a martyr and to a small dangerous set, he is.
> > > >
> > > > Those tapes should have been held for a certain period of 
time,
> > so
> > > > that authorities (whoever they are) could glean from them
> > whatever
> > > > they needed, and then available to anyone closely related to 
the
> > > > tragedy should they wish to see them. Families, friends,
> > counselors.
> > > >
> > > > It wasn't wrong for NBC to edit those videos, it was wrong of
> > them
> > > to
> > > > air to air them and to air them so quickly.
> > > >
> > > > It speaks volumes that families booked on The Today Show have
> > > > cancelled their appearances because of the handling of the 
video.
> > > Now
> > > > NBC has backpedaled and say they're going to be more careful
> > about
> > > the
> > > > remaining footage that they show. Too little too late.
> > > >
> > > > I'm disgusted by what NBC has done, and I find the idea
> > that "well,
> > > of
> > > > course NBC had to air the videos" repellent.
> > > >
> > > > Bekah
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected] <videoblogging%
40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "Heath" <heathparks@>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe I missed it but I still have not seem anyone say how 
they
> > > would
> > > > > have covered it. I only see and hear people saying how the 
MSM
> > > is
> > > > > covering it is wrong. So I ask out to the group, you are the
> > > news
> > > > > director you have the ablilty to shape how this story is 
told,
> > > how do
> > > > > you do that?
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not trying to defend MSM, what I am asking is "how" we 
do
> > it
> > > > > differently, how do you balance it. Or any story for that
> > > matter.
> > > > >
> > > > > you mentioned my comment on the right to know vs privacy, I 
was
> > > > > speaking in general terms and not to this paticular 
incident. I
> > > have
> > > > > no idea how I would feel, maybe I would want to tell people
> > about
> > > my
> > > > > son or daughter, maybe I would retreat into myself, I 
simply do
> > > not
> > > > > know.
> > > > >
> > > > > Heath
> > > > > http://batmangeek.com
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected]<videoblogging%
40yahoogroups.com>,
> > Rupert <rupert@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Heath,
> > > > > > I guess my last post covered some of what you're asking 
here,
> > > but
> > > > > I'm
> > > > > > going to reply anyway.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "And as far as the mainstream media's coverage, what 
should
> > > they do?
> > > > > > How should they cover it?"
> > > > > > You're right - at the moment, this is the only way they 
can
> > > > > satisfy
> > > > > > their shareholders and funders. It's their way of 
attracting
> > > the
> > > > > > largest number of people. How they *should* cover it, if 
you
> > > were
> > > > > to
> > > > > > prioritize humanity, morals, intelligence and making the
> > world
> > > a
> > > > > > better place, is a different matter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "It's always a fine line between the right to know and
> > privacy."
> > > > > > In reference to this particular case, I really think you'd
> > have
> > > a
> > > > > > hard time delivering this line to a victim of this 
massacre,
> > or
> > > of
> > > > > > any copycat massacre.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "I hear a lot of people on this list bash the MSM but I 
see
> > > very
> > > > > few
> > > > > > answers or way to "solve" the issues that they see. How 
can
> > we
> > > > > expect
> > > > > > anything better if we can't, won't or don't know a better
> > way?"
> > > > > > That's *all* we talk about, even obliquely, I reckon. The
> > > > > technology
> > > > > > we're pioneering here *is* the solution. We *are* the 
better
> > > > > way.
> > > > > > As I said in my last post, I think things will change as a
> > > result
> > > > > of
> > > > > > the economic threat to MSM bullshit that's presented by 
the
> > > > > internet
> > > > > > and on-demand media easily accessed from the couch & TV. 
When
> > > > > > there's no limit on channels and *everyone* can compete, 
the
> > > media
> > > > > > will want to reach out to a whole bunch of niche audiences
> > that
> > > > > they
> > > > > > couldn't afford to bother with before.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "And who says what is better or not better? We all come 
from
> > > > > > different backgrounds, belief's, etc. It's a balancing 
act,
> > > always
> > > > > > has been."
> > > > > > Deep down, we all know what's better. We know when we're
> > > buying
> > > > > into
> > > > > > prurient not-public-interest press crap and 
watching/reading
> > > what
> > > > > > they want us to watch because it's too hard to do anything
> > > else.
> > > > > > When we consume our media differently, when there's no 
limits
> > > on
> > > > > > distribution and so no limit to choice of product, we'll
> > choose
> > > a
> > > > > lot
> > > > > > more of the Good stuff, instead of the stuff that's only
> > there
> > > > > > because of the imperative to maximize the shareholders' 
ROI.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rupert
> > > > > > http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/
> > > > > > http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/
> > > > > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 19 Apr 2007, at 15:59, Heath wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > .
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://geekentertainment.tv
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply via email to