Autodidact_33
Senior Member
Media and How it Covers Crime
It seems that in some countries, every few months the media covers another horrific crime in the form of a massacre. In the media, its seems countless documentaries
are made about individuals who harm fellow citizens for either personal reasons or for gratification. Sometimes films are made about real men who perpetrated horrific crimes against real people, films which sometimes humanize these criminals who have killed men and women. It seems when it comes to how the media covers such crimes either through news coverage, documentaries or films; it is the irrational criminal who brought about such tragic events who is made the center of the story and their names enter the common vernacular. But their victims, who where the ones who did the commendable thing of contributing to society through work and not being a detriment to the lives of others who have their tragic deaths minimized and their killers are made famous. News coverage of massacres seems to almost turn the perpetrator into an anti-hero who will have his name and history plastered on millions of televisions screens; some unbalanced individuals who cannot understand the sanctity of human life may find such notoriety desirable. Serial murderers have documentaries and films made about them and while their crimes may not be glamorized it still makes sure that some people who have committed terrible atrocities against their fellow men and women will earn a place in the history of crime ensuring that they will be remembered long after their crimes have been stopped. Many people can recite the names of the worst murderers of the past century but who will probably not know the name of a single one of their victims; does it not seem that in how the media covers such crimes in both the present and in the future gives most of its focus to the individual who has brought about these tragic and sad events and the victims become faceless? For that small segment within any society capable of such horrors, they may find becoming famous something they may crave. Should people who do horrible things to their fellow citizen be given so much attention in the media?
Perhaps the media, in how it covers such crimes either when it happens or when it remembers such crimes in the future; should only cover the names of those who perished and the grief of the families affected. The name of the perpetrator perhaps should be withheld from the public as to deny such malevolent men the notoriety they may crave. That it may be helpful if only the lost where to be remembered and those responsible for that loss would be white washed out of the media and history.
Should such men be made famous?
It seems that in some countries, every few months the media covers another horrific crime in the form of a massacre. In the media, its seems countless documentaries
are made about individuals who harm fellow citizens for either personal reasons or for gratification. Sometimes films are made about real men who perpetrated horrific crimes against real people, films which sometimes humanize these criminals who have killed men and women. It seems when it comes to how the media covers such crimes either through news coverage, documentaries or films; it is the irrational criminal who brought about such tragic events who is made the center of the story and their names enter the common vernacular. But their victims, who where the ones who did the commendable thing of contributing to society through work and not being a detriment to the lives of others who have their tragic deaths minimized and their killers are made famous. News coverage of massacres seems to almost turn the perpetrator into an anti-hero who will have his name and history plastered on millions of televisions screens; some unbalanced individuals who cannot understand the sanctity of human life may find such notoriety desirable. Serial murderers have documentaries and films made about them and while their crimes may not be glamorized it still makes sure that some people who have committed terrible atrocities against their fellow men and women will earn a place in the history of crime ensuring that they will be remembered long after their crimes have been stopped. Many people can recite the names of the worst murderers of the past century but who will probably not know the name of a single one of their victims; does it not seem that in how the media covers such crimes in both the present and in the future gives most of its focus to the individual who has brought about these tragic and sad events and the victims become faceless? For that small segment within any society capable of such horrors, they may find becoming famous something they may crave. Should people who do horrible things to their fellow citizen be given so much attention in the media?
Perhaps the media, in how it covers such crimes either when it happens or when it remembers such crimes in the future; should only cover the names of those who perished and the grief of the families affected. The name of the perpetrator perhaps should be withheld from the public as to deny such malevolent men the notoriety they may crave. That it may be helpful if only the lost where to be remembered and those responsible for that loss would be white washed out of the media and history.
Should such men be made famous?
