WDBJ7 Reporter Killed On Air

Toothpaste · Aug 26, 2015

You would think now that some of their own has been killed the media might think to stop turning these villains into anti-heroes by splashing their name and picture all over their news broadcasts and sharing every single detail of the manifestos these men MAIL TO THE NETWORKS IN ORDER THAT THEY CAN BE FAMOUS. I know that this won't end the brutal gun violence in the states, but maybe just maybe if the news stopped making these guys famous and instead focused on the crime and the victims, never sharing the name or the face of the perpetrator, that would prevent a few of the crazies out there who just want to go down in a blaze of glory and infamy.

Oh but no. That's never ever going to happen. Because why should we ever actually do things that could possibly prevent this shit? That's just silly.

Mark Moore · Aug 26, 2015

Here's Alison's Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/alisonparkernews?fref=ts

cmhbob · Aug 26, 2015

I'm honestly surprised this is the first use of a Go-Pro or similar device in a slaughter like this. Apparently the GoPro app lets you connect your camera to your phone and almost live-stream the action. Makes the autonomous flying camera I saw the other day just that much more creepy, and I love techy stuff.

The cameraman's fiancee was in the control room when it happened. It was her last day at the station. The reporter was soon to be or already engaged as well, to an anchor at the station.

blacbird · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
You would think now that some of their own has been killed the media might think to stop turning these villains into anti-heroes by splashing their name and picture all over their news broadcasts and sharing every single detail of the manifestos these men MAIL TO THE NETWORKS IN ORDER THAT THEY CAN BE FAMOUS. I know that this won't end the brutal gun violence in the states, but maybe just maybe if the news stopped making these guys famous and instead focused on the crime and the victims, never sharing the name or the face of the perpetrator, that would prevent a few of the crazies out there who just want to go down in a blaze of glory and infamy.

Oh but no. That's never ever going to happen. Because why should we ever actually do things that could possibly prevent this shit? That's just silly.

Like it or not, it's NEWS. It just is. Some people become famous (INfamous) by doing outrageous, horrible things, and they revel in that horrid glory, and ain't really anything we can do about that. You'd prefer not to know things rather than to know them?

I'm glad the guy is dead. He won't get to revel in any of the aftermath.

caw

badwolf.usmc · Aug 26, 2015

cmhbob said:
I'm honestly surprised this is the first use of a Go-Pro or similar device in a slaughter like this. Apparently the GoPro app lets you connect your camera to your phone and almost live-stream the action. Makes the autonomous flying camera I saw the other day just that much more creepy, and I love techy stuff.

The cameraman's fiancee was in the control room when it happened. It was her last day at the station. The reporter was soon to be or already engaged as well, to an anchor at the station.

I've used my Go-Pro that and it's not as useful as you may think. The Go-Pro creates its own wi-fi network that your phone can connect to so the range is limited and depending on how far away the video can be jittery.

Toothpaste · Aug 26, 2015

Blacbird - it's not all or nothing like that. Come on, you know better. News outlets determine what is newsworthy all the time. There is no objective true version of the news. We all know how certain protests don't get coverage for political reasons, how certain crimes get more coverage depending on the race of the perpetrator. And how the same kinds of crimes will get vastly different kinds of coverage. News is just what we humans want to share.

So we determine what in this story is newsworthy. And what is newsworthy here? The event. Yes. The victims. Yes. What might have motivated the criminal so that we can analyse the larger implications in society, sure (though we don't need to read his literal words). But his name? His face? Why is that necessary? Truly? He killed himself. He's not a threat. We don't need to know any of that. Not really. Not more than curiosity sake.

Here in Canada when we had our horrific shooting at the parliament buildings very few news outlets ran a picture of the gunman. His name was revealed yes, but in passing and it was not dwelled on. We learned about his likely motive for the killing. But the lion's share of the attention was on the victim and on the hero who shot him. To the point where I don't even remember the shooter's name and face. And I'm glad. I don't need to know his name. His name is irrelevant to me. His actions are what mattered. THAT's how I think it should be done. You might disagree and need to know what he looked like and his name and think that very important. But I think the media stopping making these people infamous is a far more important act, than indulging our curiosity of what the dude looked like. We need to tell these horrible nasty men that do this that you won't get famous. We won't remember you for a moment. We will remember your victims, the people you hate. Oh yes, those people will be now known for ever and we will care about them and feel horrible about them and think about them far more than we will ever think about your pathetic sorry ass.

Say he was a white male of a certain age who was a former employee of the station. What more information do you need?

SomethingOrOther · Aug 26, 2015

This thread is so getting blocked. Would rather not be sad every time I open P&CE for the next few weeks.

William Haskins · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
Say he was a white male of a certain age who was a former employee of the station. What more information do you need?

obviously someone to tell you he was a black male.

Perks · Aug 26, 2015

This story has just gotten to me today. We've got shooter threads starting here with terrible regularity, and all sorts of ugliness daily. But today, it just took something out of me. It's just so goddamned awful.

Jcomp · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
Blacbird - it's not all or nothing like that. Come on, you know better. News outlets determine what is newsworthy all the time. There is no objective true version of the news. We all know how certain protests don't get coverage for political reasons, how certain crimes get more coverage depending on the race of the perpetrator. And how the same kinds of crimes will get vastly different kinds of coverage. News is just what we humans want to share.

So we determine what in this story is newsworthy. And what is newsworthy here? The event. Yes. The victims. Yes. What might have motivated the criminal so that we can analyse the larger implications in society, sure (though we don't need to read his literal words). But his name? His face? Why is that necessary? Truly? He killed himself. He's not a threat. We don't need to know any of that. Not really. Not more than curiosity sake.

Here in Canada when we had our horrific shooting at the parliament buildings very few news outlets ran a picture of the gunman. His name was revealed yes, but in passing and it was not dwelled on. We learned about his likely motive for the killing. But the lion's share of the attention was on the victim and on the hero who shot him. To the point where I don't even remember the shooter's name and face. And I'm glad. I don't need to know his name. His name is irrelevant to me. His actions are what mattered. THAT's how I think it should be done. You might disagree and need to know what he looked like and his name and think that very important. But I think the media stopping making these people infamous is a far more important act, than indulging our curiosity of what the dude looked like. We need to tell these horrible nasty men that do this that you won't get famous. We won't remember you for a moment. We will remember your victims, the people you hate. Oh yes, those people will be now known for ever and we will care about them and feel horrible about them and think about them far more than we will ever think about your pathetic sorry ass.

Say he was a white male of a certain age who was a former employee of the station. What more information do you need?

Not realistic. Especially in a situation like this one where the subject is at large and a threat to the public. Simply leaving it at "black male of a certain age who was a former employee of the station" frankly does the public a disservice if more is actually known about the perpetrator that people can use to ensure they recognize him if they cross his path.

Even in the example you described, the media outlets provided the name and face of the perp. You just filtered it out.

Cramp · Aug 26, 2015

Partially relevant maybe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4

ElaineA · Aug 26, 2015

Perks said:
This story has just gotten to me today. We've got shooter threads starting here with terrible regularity, and all sorts of ugliness daily. But today, it just took something out of me. It's just so goddamned awful.

Me, too. It was seeing the killer, gun pointed, through the news camera's viewfinder that did me in.

nighttimer · Aug 26, 2015

Perks said:
This story has just gotten to me today. We've got shooter threads starting here with terrible regularity, and all sorts of ugliness daily. But today, it just took something out of me. It's just so goddamned awful.

Maybe it's because we've been here so many times before when the kill zone was a school, an office, a shopping center, a church or anywhere human beings/targets can be found. We've seen the blood, the bullet holes, the corpses and the terrible aftermath of a killing spree. We've even seen the deadly slaughter play out in real time.

But this...this is different.

I can't say I have ever seen a young woman murdered as we watch in horror and revulsion. I can't say I have seen a murderer exult in his kill by triumphantly posting it all over social media. I can't say I have seen two people die like this before my disbelieving eyes.

Now I can say I have seen all this and I can say it makes me sick to my stomach and saddened to the core of my soul.

Perks · Aug 26, 2015

Yeah, I'm a mess. That he filmed it on a Go-Pro. I saw it. He lifted the gun, then lowered it again. You could hear him breathing. I don't know if in that moment, his commitment to his errand wavered. It was too horrible know that it would come back, in a trickle or a rush, but inevitably, he put the gun back up and did that hideous thing.

It's just too much.

Amadan · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
Blacbird - it's not all or nothing like that. Come on, you know better. News outlets determine what is newsworthy all the time. There is no objective true version of the news. We all know how certain protests don't get coverage for political reasons, how certain crimes get more coverage depending on the race of the perpetrator. And how the same kinds of crimes will get vastly different kinds of coverage. News is just what we humans want to share.

For the media to all collaboratively decide that they will not share "unnecessary" information in order to discourage people from trying to get famous by committing murder would be asking them to make judgment calls that I'm really not comfortable delegating to them.

Does the media run on sensationalism and gossip and guts? Yes. Do we need to know the details of Jen and Brad's relationship difficulties? Do we need to know about some celebrity's naughty sex tape that was nobody else's business? The media is going to report what sells, and as much as I may despise what most people find interesting, I also don't want news agencies getting together to decide how to collectively filter the news either.

shakeysix · Aug 26, 2015

That video caught me behind the knees this morning. It ruined an introspective day, of mourning, of gardening, a thoughtful walk in a shady park. I can't think about anything but the hate in that man's eyes. Everything is off now. Funeral of a friend today--a gay man who was my hair dresser from the time I was in college. I have been thinking of him, Charlie, today. He was older than I am but of the same generation. He did not always have things his way. He lived with a partner for 25 years. It was a small town and they did catch some grief over the years. He was a veteran, an old Navy guy. He did things like they did them in the Navy, drove his partner nuts from time to time. He had a temper and he had no problem sounding off when he was pissed. He was a fighter but no murderer. He treated people the way he wanted to be treated.

Where does the hate come from? How does someone spend a lifetime wallowing in hatred and victim hood? Thrive on it until he snaps and becomes a scheming, murderous monster. Not just this new monster, I'm also thinking of that nameless moron in Kansas who mistakenly killed non-Jewish people, one a 15 year old kid, and then used his hatred of Jews as a defense in his trial. When the judge threw his rant out, he asked "How can I prove my innocence if I can't tell you why I killed them?" Hate is everywhere and it is frightening.

An unnerving day but I will think of my friend Charlie on this day and try to love--s6

backslashbaby · Aug 26, 2015

Someone I follow on Twitter is upset that the media is picking and choosing which parts of the manifesto to display, because he's a Black male. On that twitter thread, another follower of hers is upset that they are making the victims out to be angels because of white supremacy.

Lovely.

As it turns out, the shooter mentions in his manifesto that Dylan Roof wanted a race war, so here's a race war, basically.

These shooters always have grievances, and the racial grievance is certainly a very difficult burden, but don't give fucking Dylan Roof what he wanted! And don't kill your fucking co-workers. I have no empathy for him, or suspicions that the media is trying to make him look particularly bad because he's Black (in this case). The law in Virgina already even called him disturbed. Hey, progress that the Black fuckhead shooters get to be called disturbed right away, eh? It's not the sort of progress I'm interested in

I'm just so aggravated at the whole thing.

blacbird · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
Blacbird - it's not all or nothing like that. Come on, you know better. News outlets determine what is newsworthy all the time.
Say he was a white male of a certain age who was a former employee of the station. What more information do you need?

You need to start by understanding that I was, for five years, a broadcast news reporter. This horrific event was played out on LIVE TV. You somehow think that coverage should be suppressed? Or even could be?

Toothpaste said:
Say he was a white male of a certain age who was a former employee of the station. What more information do you need?

As Haskins has pointed out, the guy wasn't a white male. His image is plainly visible on the video. The police would be obliged to release his name upon arrest and charges being filed. As happened, he killed himself. But that name cannot be suppressed. News outlets don't suppress stories of this magnitude. They just don't. Period. Flat period. They don't. They never will. Nor should they.

There are times to keep things like suspect identities confidential, and, in general, most news outlets will cooperate with law inforcement authorities who request they do, at least for short time periods. But not always. And far too often, law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities think they should be able to suppress all kinds of stuff in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That's why we've had to pass a Freedom of Information law.

Sometimes it doesn't work well. The D.C. sniper shootings of some years ago were an example of a situation where public release of (what turned out to be false) information hindered the investigation. But that is pretty unusual.

This event today was NEWS. Pure and simple. When the initial information was released, the guy was on the run. Police wanted to know if anyone had seen him. That's a reasonable thing for them to do, and they made no move to suppress anything. I don't see anything in the reportage of it so far that merits suppression of information.

caw

William Haskins · Aug 26, 2015

blacbird said:
You need to start by understanding that I was, for five years, a broadcast news reporter.

he was eventually let go for signing off each of his stories with "caw."

blacbird · Aug 26, 2015

William Haskins said:
he was eventually let go for signing off each of his stories with "caw."

I've been outed. Again.

caw

Toothpaste · Aug 26, 2015

I get that news outlets won't do this. I said as much. I think they should, but I know they won't. Others will think differently. I think turning these people into celebrities inspires copy-cat crimes and I think that that therefore should matter. But I know I am in the minority with these sorts of things. I'm not a fool. I'm an angry human being who is tired of seeing the same thing happen over and over and reading excuses about how there's really nothing to be done because insert philosophy here. That's all. I have no sway. Have no fear about my opinions. Your news will stay as sensationalistic as it's always been.

Also the suspect isn't at large, he killed himself. That's why I said his name doesn't matter anymore.

And I had to shake my head at my racial profiling. I have been on purpose avoiding info about the man for the reasons I stated above, I also will never watch the video of people losing their lives, and just assumed he was a white male, because white males tend to be the perpetrators of this kind of violence (those who shoot up schools and movie theatres and sororities etc). My apologies.

Also blacbird, come off it. I know it was on live TV. There was nothing they could do about it then. But we all know that there will be tons of conversations about it for days now, and dissection of his manifesto (which was precisely what he wanted people to do), that his face will be plastered everywhere. I'm not saying suppress the important facts. I'm saying don't turn him into a celebrity. But you know, you were a news reporter so you know best.

I'm out of this thread, I have no energy for your cynical "This is how it's always been and how it's gotta be" today.

backslashbaby · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste, nah. He's so much like the other shooters as far as MO goes, the racial part hardly matters, imho.

The race war part is unusual, though, and it angers me almost as much as Dylan Roof doing it, but this guy shot his co-workers, so it's pretty clear that he had multiple motives, I think. I get angered not because he may not have valid complaints but because these folks always go shoot up a group of people as a way of 'handling' that. It's the same old story, and we have too much of it!

blacbird · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
I get that news outlets won't do this. I said as much. I think they should, but I know they won't. Others will think differently. I think turning these people into celebrities inspires copy-cat crimes and I think that that therefore should matter. But I know I am in the minority with these sorts of things.

Toothpaste said:

Also the suspect isn't at large, he killed himself.

Click to expand...

When his name was released, I believe he was still at large.

As far as releasing names of deceased mass and serial killers, do you really mean to suggest the names of Seun-Hui Cho, George Hennard, Charles Whitman, James Huberty, Mark Barton, Herbert Baumeister, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, etc., should not be released because they killed themselves or were killed by police before they could be captured?

Copycat crimes happen because some lunatic gets enamored of the event itself, not because they get enamored of the people who committed it. I doubt that any racist hate-filled frothbrain even remotely cares about Dylann Storm Roof; but that person just might be triggered to do something similar because of what Roof did. That's possible. You think the media should suppress reportage about the event itself? That the media should be reporting stories about pretty flowers and butterflies and fluffy bunnies cavorting in green grass on nice sunny spring days, instead?

In Canada, you can boast the most prolific proven serial killer known in North America, Robert Pickton. You also have about the most well-documented unsolved and ongoing series of murders, along the "Highway of Tears" in British Columbia. There are permanent signs up all along that highway (I've driven it) warning people about the dangers of hitchhiking because of these murders. You think news about those things should be suppressed? When the Highway of Tears murders get solved, as we must all hope they will, should the name of the perpetrator(s) be kept from the media?

caw

LJD · Aug 26, 2015

Toothpaste said:
Here in Canada when we had our horrific shooting at the parliament buildings very few news outlets ran a picture of the gunman. His name was revealed yes, but in passing and it was not dwelled on. We learned about his likely motive for the killing.

Actually, even for the WDBJ7 story, I think the Canadian media have been focusing more on the victims than the gunman. Whereas when I go to American sites, I see big pictures of the gunman splashed about. Compare, say, the front pages of the CBC and The Toronto Star websites vs. CNN, ABC News, Fox News...

Toothpaste · Aug 26, 2015

blacbird said:
Copycat crimes happen because some lunatic gets enamored of the event itself, not because they get enamored of the people who committed it. I doubt that any racist hate-filled frothbrain even remotely cares about Dylann Storm Roof; but that person just might be triggered to do something similar because of what Roof did. That's possible. You think the media should suppress reportage about the event itself? That the media should be reporting stories about pretty flowers and butterflies and fluffy bunnies cavorting in green grass on nice sunny spring days, instead?

caw

I NEVER BLOODY SAID THAT. Stop it. Stop it now. You are being disingenous and unkind and unempathetic. You have read my words, I have offered other ways of reporting the events that don't turn these men into celebrities and you keep manipulating the situation to make it look like I'm saying no bad news should ever ever be reported ever. Stop it. It's not making me look bad, it's making you look like you don't know how to read.

And yeah? Is that what people are copying? You have the numbers there to back you up there? You don't think any of these guys maybe want infamy in death? You don't think that when they send packages to news stations they do do it because they've seen the news blast similar information from previous murderers everywhere? You don't think that inspires them at all? At all??? Come on man.

NOW I'm leaving.

WDBJ7 Reporter Killed On Air

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Did...did I do that?

#CustomUserTitle

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

-

poet

delicate #!&@*#! flower

Pain in the writing wrist

All about that action, boss.

No Gods No Masters

delicate #!&@*#! flower

blue eyed floozy

~~~~*~~~~

poet

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

~~~~*~~~~

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

*

*