heath, i agree with you that there are no answers and this is just a tragedy. but again, it's not the reporters job to be empathic, just to report. having worked in a newsroom for 5 years, this was a hard lesson for me to learn.
On 4/20/07, Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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 videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, > 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 videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com><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 > > > > videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com><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 > > > > > videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com><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 > > > > > > videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> > <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] > > > > > -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
