Re: Rampage in Colorado Movie theater.
This. There are no politics in this situation, as far as I am concerned. Kid was crazy/sick/whatever. So don't bring up gun control, republican/democrat crap, etc etc. It's a tragedy, and one that probably could not be prevented.
It might have been prevented in other socieities. There is an awful lot that's similar about the commentary following each mass shooting: Columbine, VTU, Tucson and now this. The same people who always offer their opinions are again offering opinions, which in many instances are nearly word for word the same as the opinions they offered on previous occasions. And no more accurate or relevant.
Part of this is the result of the 24 hour news cycle, in which everyone with any connection at all to the victims or perpetrator is dragged into a studio someplace and questioned. "We have ZaSu Pitts, who lockered next to Holmes in 8th grade PE for his perspective." Producers earn their pay in these deals because cable anchors don't want to be (in Sonny Corleone's words) "holding their diks in their hands."
In the hours immediately following this kind of event, cable news does an invaluable service, providing the facts and the pictures. Later, it gets a little harder, since there's much less "breaking" news to report. And the people available for insight are generally significantly less important.
Remember in the immediate aftermath of Columbine there was a lot of talk about "The Trenchcoat Mafia." And implications that either Klebold or Harris (or both) "belonged" to this group and that might be significant. Turns out "The Trenchcoat Mafia" was the name chosen by some unpopular kids for their group picture in the yearbook. They got their dusters, posed for the picture, and that was the end of it. Yet hundreds of thousands of "very important" words were uttered about this "group" and what significance it may have had to the shootings. It was put into perspective when the principal said he'd never heard of "The Trenchcoat Mafia."
In the immediate aftermath of the JFK shooting, there was a lot of talk about "right wingers" in Dallas (Oliver Stone's still talking about it). After all, somebody put out flyers accusing the President of "treason," UN Ambassador Adlai Stevenson had been pushed around and there were some Confederate flags displayed on the motorcade route. Hesto, presto, a "right wing" plot to assassinate the president. Later, we learned somebody had also taken a shot at the uber right wing General Walker (turns out it was the same guy who had shot the president). Even so, there was more than a little talk about "Dallas hanging its head in shame." And being a "hotbed of hate." After Bobby Kennedy was shot, tens of thousands of "important words" were uttered about the "woman in the polka dot dress." More of the same.
When a suspect was capturedd in Dallas, and it turned out he had defected to the Soviet Union, the narrative changed to: "We really don't know what motivated the alleged assassin and we shouldn't jump to conclusions." That's almost always good advice.
Editing, live, is a risky proposition, fraught with perils. The late Frank Reynolds exploded on ABC during coverage of the Reagan assassination attempt, demanding that "we get this right," after he had erroneously reported that Press Secretary Jim Brady had died. So I'm generally inclined to give people plenary dispesations for their various high crimes and misdemeanors while reporting in "wall to wall" situations. I've done it and it ain't easy.
