TOO DAMN MUCH COVERAGE ON THIS SHOOTING!!!!

[Marckd]

Okay - yes something this serious should be covered - maybe for a few hours - Maybe all day in the Hartford and New York City markets - MAYBE - MAYBE NOT -

Here is what I find wrong. The coverage was redundant. They said the same 10 things 10,000 times all day long. Also with all this coverage - I believe it does far more harm than good. What it does is gives a few more crazy people ideas. Now I think there should be coverage of this Connecticut Shooting - BUT NOT NEARLY AS MUCH AS WE HAD...ABD CERTAINLY NOT NATIONWIDE WALL TO WALL...All this does is give the ones that causes this attention. What scares me is this can happen anywhere we go. At the grocery store, at church, at Wal mart, at the mall, at a restaurant, at a gas station...Are we safe at any public place...

Maybe at an airport terminal, a courthouse, some schools that have metal detectors, and at Six Flags parks which also have metal detectors...Will we have to put such devices everyehere we go??? Will we have to go through security checkpoints to eat at Burger King (where I was when I heard about the shooting around 1145 AM when only 3 people were dead...My vote was to quit when we were ahead and the rest of the people were still alive...Instead another 2 dozen people died during the coverage - Okay I am being sarcastic now but the coverage was just over the top). This just scares me. I will have to watch my back whenever someone that looks a little strange comes near me...Sad...Scary..

 

[MickeyD]

Well if you lived in Arizona it might be too much coverage but if you live in the state where the tragedy occurred you should expect it.

 

[reelyreal]

You have the choice not to watch the coverage. However, if you're asking why there's so much coverage of the second deadliest shooting in American history, I think the question answers itself... especially here in CT/NY.

If there were little coverage, there'd be people decrying the failure of the media to inform the community.

 

[landtuna]

I'm not speaking for the OP here but yesterday I happened upon Yahoo.com and on their big red banner was: BREAKING NEWS ABC LIVE COVERAGE. So I clicked on it and found instead a national anchor talking about the other half-dozen mass shootings since Colombine.

Hello? This is NOT "breaking news". It is historical perspective if anything but doesn't belong in the first hours of coverage of a new story.

Things like this are what ticks me off about any story of this magnitude. Endless blabbing about things which are not specific to the actual breaking news.

 

[WNTIRadio]

People tune in and out. So you, listening to it non-stop, would be hearing the same things over and over. Someone getting in the car would hear it for the first time.

Also, what are stations supposed to do? Ignore it and play happy pop music?

Sometimes, people on this board are disconnected from reality. Yes, radio is a business but sometimes it does take a back seat when there is a tragedy on this level. And you know what else? None of radio matters at all to the victims and their families.

So, Mr. ALL CAPS, THERE'S TOO DAMN MUCH HEAD UP THE A** SYNDROME GOING ON HERE.

 

[MoldaMania182]

People tune in and out. So you, listening to it non-stop, would be hearing the same things over and over. Someone getting in the car would hear it for the first time.

Also, what are stations supposed to do? Ignore it and play happy pop music?

Actually, yes. As tragic and sad the incident is, in the grand scheme it's a very isolated incident. For the rest of us, life goes on. By all means be hug your kids a little closer, say a prayer, count your blessings, but life goes on. This wasn't Sandy, or 9/11.

Sometimes, people on this board are disconnected from reality. Yes, radio is a business but sometimes it does take a back seat when there is a tragedy on this level. And you know what else? None of radio matters at all to the victims and their families.

Again, no offense to anyone, but what level?? It's a very very sad story, but still an isolated incident in a small town that has already happened and very little to nothing anyone can do to make it better. Your last point is kind of seems contradictory to everything else.

I don't think the coverage has been too much, I'm guessing it seems that way to some because there's nothing else to add to the story. It happened, the deranged low life who caused this is dead, there's nothing else to know. Even if we truly learn a motive it won't bring the innocent children back.

 

[landtuna]

I understand why radio and TV needs to stay on the story even though there is nothing new to report but that does not explain what I heard on local TV in Phoenix this morning.

Morning show. Typical happy talk and features. Interview with Charles Barkley coming up. You would expect this to center around basketball because Sir Charles was once a Phoenix Sun and the Suns are, so far, having a terrible year.

So, after the pleasantries what is the first question asked of Mr. Barkley? "What do you think of the tragedy in Connecticut?"

HUH?

Crap like this really disturbs me about media people.

 

[TimeIsTight]

This was far far more than just a "National" story in the US.

Out of curiosity on Friday, I picked up live TV news channels from all over the world. The US shooting was the top story on NHK in Japan, and Al Jazerra-English from Doha. There was wall-to-wall coverage on the BBC domestic news channel for the UK, and on BBC International for the rest of the world. There was non-stop coverage on the France-24 where they had a related discussion on gun control. Russia Today had full coverage and were talking to "experts" about gun violence in the US. And PressTV out of Iran had a San Francisco-based editorial writer (the guy looked like an old hippie) on explaining how the "the US is a violent society, with unhappy young people who can't get a job, mentally crack up and do this kind thing." Even the Iranian host sounded like he wasn't buying it.

I didn't bother to check Korean, Taiwanese, Australian, Irish or Canadian TV news broadcasts because I already knew what they were covering, and I didn't bother to fire up either of my short-wave radios to see what was on the few international news stations there. I already knew.

The point is that we now live in a global village, and the whole world is watching. It was an unspeakable tragedy for that small town in Connecticut and all those unfortunate people and families, but the whole world was hurting with them, and the US image was once again internationally damaged by some mentally ill individual with too easy access to a gun made for soldiers or police.

It was a national tragedy, and as with any other coverage of anything, when you have had enough you have the option to turn it off.

There were radio and TV channels offering something else to watch or listen to. You always have the option of taking a walk, reading a book, going shopping, or pulling out a DVD. There is little doubt that everything we could have accurately known about the shooting could have been compressed into a ten-minute report. But wall-to-wall coverage is the new international standard in massively tragic situations like this, the BBC and Al Jazeera still have multiple live reporters and crews at the scene, along with all the US networks and local stations. Welcome to 21st Century news coverage.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

The scene of the shooting was about 70 miles from New York and about 45 miles from Hartford, so it would become a major news story in both cities.

And of course, it became a major worldwide news story as well.

In the Northeast, I feel that the saturation news coverage on both radio and TV was appropriate and justified, given the proximity of these stations to where the story occurred.

 

[marconis gallbladder]

Also, what are stations supposed to do? Ignore it and play happy pop music?

Actually, yes. As tragic and sad the incident is, in the grand scheme it's a very isolated incident. For the rest of us, life goes on. By all means be hug your kids a little closer, say a prayer, count your blessings, but life goes on. This wasn't Sandy, or 9/11.

Sorry, but you're just plain wrong. For a great number of people -- especially outside the East coast -- this is worse than Sandy, because 20 innocent children died for no good reason. We expect hurricanes every year. Nobody sends their kids to school expecting them to die at the hands of a deranged gunman. Yes, stations have to continue to play happy pop music, but if they ignore this, then they're punching their own ticket on the Irrelevance Train. It's what your listeners are talking about...you damn well better be too.

Again, no offense to anyone, but what level?? It's a very very sad story, but still an isolated incident in a small town that has already happened and very little to nothing anyone can do to make it better.

People have small children everywhere. Safety is a universal concern.

I'm not suggesting everybody should have dropped music and gone wall-to-wall coverage, but if you blanched, announced it once and then went on like a normal day...you didn't do your job. Period.

 

[MoldaMania182]

Also, what are stations supposed to do? Ignore it and play happy pop music?

Actually, yes. As tragic and sad the incident is, in the grand scheme it's a very isolated incident. For the rest of us, life goes on. By all means be hug your kids a little closer, say a prayer, count your blessings, but life goes on. This wasn't Sandy, or 9/11.

Sorry, but you're just plain wrong.

Let's take it easy here, there are no rights and wrongs. This is a discussion forum, everything here is a matter of opinion.

For a great number of people -- especially outside the East coast -- this is worse than Sandy, because 20 innocent children died for no good reason. We expect hurricanes every year. Nobody sends their kids to school expecting them to die at the hands of a deranged gunman. Yes, stations have to continue to play happy pop music, but if they ignore this, then they're punching their own ticket on the Irrelevance Train. It's what your listeners are talking about...you damn well better be too.

Again, no offense to anyone, but what level?? It's a very very sad story, but still an isolated incident in a small town that has already happened and very little to nothing anyone can do to make it better.

People have small children everywhere. Safety is a universal concern.

I'm not suggesting everybody should have dropped music and gone wall-to-wall coverage, but if you blanched, announced it once and then went on like a normal day...you didn't do your job. Period.

Look I haven't been on the air in some time, that wasn't my perspective nor what I was getting at. At no point am I trying to in any way diminish the loss and tragedy that's occurred next to our backyard, it's something even the darkest plots of Criminal Minds wouldn't come up with. In fact I defended the coverage we've had so far. The parents of my best friend expected him to return home after working without being run down and killed by a drunk driver too, and guess what...? Point is bad things can happen; this wasn't the first and unfortunately won't be the last. That's life, it's the harsh truth. Every day is a gift, regardless of your age.

 

[nd2023]

I'd say there was more coverage of the shooting on the Connecticut radio stations than the New Jersey stations covered the hurricane. Several music stations either simulcasted a TV station or did their own coverage. People had a lot to say about it, and the stations took phone calls. It was clear to distinguish which stations had experienced news staffs that knew how to relay all the information coming in with unknown accuracy. ESPN surprisingly had the best radio coverage, quite possibly because they could have been the first network to arrive at the school. They were also not under pressure of the news stations to break new developments first to beat the competition. I also liked WEBE 108's coverage of Connecticut residents' reactions.

 

[kp2780]

"Will we have to put such devices everyehere we go??? Will we have to go through security checkpoints to eat at Burger King"?


No, we won't. Mass shootings like this are still extremely rare. People said that sort of thing after 9/11, and other than some beefed up security at the airport, what is really different now? These things will happen from time to time, and they are tragic, but our society is too immature to ever take the hard steps needed to lessen the chances these types of things happen in the future. When you have people seriously saying that "God not being allowed in schools" is a cause of something like this (and someone who was almost the Republican nominee for President saying it), we are a silly/childish society that isn't prepared to take the hard steps necessary to improve (things like more services for mental illness, better parenting, gun control etc)

 

[tvradiogeek]

too much coverage indeed.

 

[BarryATL]

Well, from a business stand point, the coverage is happening over a weekend. This coverage is going to get better ratings than whatever normal weekend programming is on. Had this happened on Monday, there would probably be less coverage by now.

 

[Ai4i]

Madeleine Albright said it was worth the deaths of a half million children to help topple Sadaam Husein.
Remember him, the guy who did NOT have any WMD's? Let us consider these twenty deaths with some perspective. 25,000 to one is a big ratio.

 

[rageradio]

You couldve easily turned it off. Play CDs or your MP3 player. This was a horrible event and upon hearing that the victims were children I know I wanted to know details. As a father of 5 this was something close to me because its the kind of thing you keep in the back of your mind and pray this kind if thing never happens to your own. The coverage seemed to provide a feeling of being with those in Newtown.. An open channel to CT in a way. I don't know those people but its still a painful heart wrenching thing. I felt the hurt and anger as well like many other parents I'm sure

 

[atlantaboy]

Okay - yes something this serious should be covered - maybe for a few hours - Maybe all day in the Hartford and New York City markets - MAYBE - MAYBE NOT -

Here is what I find wrong. The coverage was redundant. They said the same 10 things 10,000 times all day long. Also with all this coverage - I believe it does far more harm than good. What it does is gives a few more crazy people ideas. Now I think there should be coverage of this Connecticut Shooting - BUT NOT NEARLY AS MUCH AS WE HAD...ABD CERTAINLY NOT NATIONWIDE WALL TO WALL...All this does is give the ones that causes this attention. What scares me is this can happen anywhere we go. At the grocery store, at church, at Wal mart, at the mall, at a restaurant, at a gas station...Are we safe at any public place...

Maybe at an airport terminal, a courthouse, some schools that have metal detectors, and at Six Flags parks which also have metal detectors...Will we have to put such devices everyehere we go??? Will we have to go through security checkpoints to eat at Burger King (where I was when I heard about the shooting around 1145 AM when only 3 people were dead...My vote was to quit when we were ahead and the rest of the people were still alive...Instead another 2 dozen people died during the coverage - Okay I am being sarcastic now but the coverage was just over the top). This just scares me. I will have to watch my back whenever someone that looks a little strange comes near me...Sad...Scary..

The reason it's being covered so much is that people don't want this to happen again - there are directives, either implied or outright, coming from Washington (and I agree with them)

The argument that media coverage should be minimzed so other people don't imitate the crime has been used in the past, and I think we're at a point where it's clear that this strategy just doesn't work

It's pretty clear that this was an autistic kid that was putting a video game fantasy to life - I'm not sure he even thought of how much the story would get covered

 

[1sttimecaller]

I'd be willing to bet the stations that covered this the longest WIN the day and week for PPM (Behind Christmas music, because in a time of tragedy, Christmas music is an emotional listen).


Too much coverage? Nope. Too little in most cases.

 

[Tom Wells]

Too much coverage? No. Too much fear. Too much fear-mongering. Too much "fear pornography".

It would have been possible to adequately cover the event without whipping up more fear, which is profitable.

It's all the "hand wringing" that is too much. When such coverage causes people to call for even more heavy handed
control in society, it has been too much coverage.