TV coverage of Sandy Hook shootings draws heavy criticism

Reporting considered invasive, exploitative and sensationalized

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Dec. 18, 2012 8:22 a.m.

    If the News Media had done this kind of coverage of the Benghazi incident in September, we might have known the truth about what really happened. They didn't do any kind of investigative reporting.

    Then the storm of all storms came right before the election and it was non-stop press coverage of the President walking around with the Governor of New Jersey which was a non-paid advertisement for the President for days leading up to the election day.

    The Press or Media are supposed to have some sort of standards regulated by the FCC and other agencies. These agencies have gotten to be too friendly with the people they are supposed to regulate, whether Republican or Democratic administrations.

    There is a fine line, in some of the things from 24-hour news that are a upsmanship of the other networks trying to get the edge on reporting and viewers or listeners.

    This was an elementary school that got attacked by a person who allegedly should not have had high powered weapons and access to anywhere with children present.

    This school had everything to prevent this type of incident but sick people can get through barriers to innocent children.

  • eastcoastcoug Danbury, CT
    Dec. 18, 2012 8:18 a.m.

    Arming everyone to the teeth is not the answer nor is it pragmatic. I don't want a society where every store, school and theatre I walk into has numerous unknown people carrying semi-automatic weapons, especially concealed ones. Imagine 5 - 10 people all shooting at once with our kids in the middle. Ever hear of friendly fire? Most teachers will not even pick up a gun. They are there to teach our kids which is complicated enough.

    If any of you Semi-Automatic Weapon loving people could see the carnage wreaked on these children by these weapons, or if it were your child, you would do anything to remove any and all causes of this tragedy. I'm not saying this is the only answer, but it's high time we started being more reasonable and that the majority of us who are opposed to these weapons started raising our voices. The gun lobby is very well financed and powerful. But there are more of us than of them.

  • oldcougar Orem, UT
    Dec. 18, 2012 8:00 a.m.

    Amen to all the criticism of the reporting and political exploitation of such a tragedy. In this kind of case, ALL the focus should be on the victims, NONE on the perp. Ebert is absolutely right. We don't need to know the shooter's name, see his picture, hear his sad, excuse-laden history. We just need to know a sick human committed a despicable, cowardly, evil act.

  • vdubbin' Ogden, UT
    Dec. 18, 2012 7:54 a.m.

    There is only one kind of "change" that this tragedy, and the coverage thereof, is going to cause. If gun control is what you want, that's fine. It isn't worth arguing about. However, leveraging a tragedy like this so that "something might come out of it" is, in my humble opinion, another tragedy all its own. I understand pragmatism, but imagine what the parents are going through before leaping onto any bandwagon.

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    Dec. 18, 2012 7:51 a.m.

    By the way, the answer here is to treat the CAUSE of the disease, which is the culture of violence in America. That which we teach our kids through permissive laws on media and free speech which allow graphic 1st person shooter video games and PG-13 graphic violence.

    Sure, on PG-13 we can't show nudity, or drop more than 2 F-bombs, but blowing away people by the hundreds is fair game.

    The answer? Outlaw the violent video games and rate all movies with graphic violence X. We'll change the culture of our youth in 2 decades.

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    Dec. 18, 2012 7:30 a.m.

    Here is clear proof of the left leaning bias of the mainstream media:

    All the media hype after these last 4 shootings has been about gun control, while those who love the 2nd Amendment hold that if these weren't gun free zones, a Concealed Carry Permit holder could stop the carnage.

    In the case of the Clackamas, OR. mall shooting, the gunman killed 2 people, then was confronted by a Concealed Carrier drawing a bead on him. The Permit holder did not fire on him, because there were citizens behind the gunman scurrying for safety, and he feared hitting them if he took the shot and missed.

    However, the gunman, knowing there was armed opposition, took his next shot to his own head, ending the confrontation.

    Look for the report from a local Oregon TV station on You Tube. But you'll notice that it was never reported along with the panic in the national news. Not on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN.

    The liberal media LIE BY OMISSION ALL THE TIME.

  • eastcoastcoug Danbury, CT
    Dec. 18, 2012 6:37 a.m.

    While I agree that the motives of the media are not always pure, there is another way to look at this. If this helps us as a nation to create momentum that will lead to real change, then it is worth it. At the end of WWII, citizens of the local towns around the death camps in Germany were brought in to witness the horror that was (mostly) out of their sight. I've lived in Germany and hear that this led many to resolve "never again".

    A family in our ward lost a daughter in this unspeakable tragedy. Several other friends we know had to endure the wait at the fire station for word their child was safe.

    While I feel the roots of this are cultural and complex, it is high time we took a sensible approach to the weapons flooding our society. We should ban assault weapons and do all we can to eliminate them from our homes. Put pressure on the manufacturers, the stores, everyone who profits from this carnage. I am a lifelong Republican but am sickened by the no-compromise approach of the NRA. We need to use this moment to say "never again".

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 18, 2012 5:41 a.m.

    I turned it off after the first hour and didn't turn the TV back on til 8 hrs. later. The network news "bobble head" anchors are a bad joke.

    Journalistic integrity? The 3 major networks are one step away from "National Enquirer".

  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    Dec. 17, 2012 11:49 p.m.

    I heard Edward R. Murrow would read the news with a cigarette in his mouth but he always got it right.

  • larri3 Farmington, UT
    Dec. 17, 2012 11:26 p.m.

    How about criticism of the media's outright false reports? The news media used to take pride in getting things right. Now they go on the air with rumors, innuendos, outright lies, rampant reporter opinions based on erroneous assumptions, misrepresentations and outright incorrect reporting of cold, hard facts. The media reported that the shooter's father had been murdered. False. The media reported that the mother worked at the school. False. The media initially reported that the killer was Ryan Lanza. Wrong. The media reported that the killer used a rifle. I could go on and on because there were layers of false reporting. Reporters and editors think they're doing their job nowadays if they report that other reporters have confirmed information. Reporters today regularly quote unnamed sources, but some of these are not sources at all but rather figments of the reporters' imaginations. And how much should we trust an unnamed source anyway -- someone is afraid to stand behind his or her words? The media is getting so bad that I seldom believe anything anymore for a few days at least.