We recently had a tragedy occur in our community. It involved the untimely death of two supposedly perfectly happy married people. The incident was covered by the local newspaper online as news of the event unfolded, and as is common in this day and age, it was discussed on Facebook and in the comment section of the story. After identification of the victims were made public, it was reported that the incident appeared to be a murder/suicide.
Many people were outraged that "assumptions" were made in the newspaper article. Others were angry because comments from one of the victims' Facebook page were used in the story. Others were simply upset that these two poor, unfortunate people could not be allowed to simply rest in peace.
When the story first broke, most of the comments indicated prayer for the family, calls for privacy for the family of the victims and outrage that the event was being reported at all. As the comment section of the story grew, more and more people spoke out in favor of the release of information pertaining to the story even as protests continued to be posted calling for privacy for the victims. In 2014 America, it is unreasonable to assume total privacy will be granted in the event of a newsworthy incident. It is a reporter's job to report, even if the information being communicated is tragic in nature.
Perhaps I am a bit jaded since as a peace officer I took part in investigating crimes and tragic events for almost fifteen years. However, I cannot believe that it takes experience in dealing first hand with horrific events in order to understand the role of basic common sense in putting two and two together after a tragedy, even among the casual but interested observer. I was involved in the investigation of a number of suicides over the years, and if I took anything away from the experience, it was the realization that few close to the victim saw it coming. Attempted suicides were often accompanied by obvious depression, phone calls or text messages to friends and loved ones or other types of cries for help. Successful suicides were most often indicated by a grisly discovery as the result of a welfare check or a neighbor or passerby noticing the presence of blowflies in the interior of the home's windows. Surprise. Most of the loved ones of a suicide victim never saw it coming.
Much like the neighbors of a serial killer who are very often shocked and say things such as, "He was really quiet, he sort of kept to himself", people on the verge of suicide, or for that matter murder/suicide, do not always display indicators that it is imminent. While shock and sorrow after an event such as this are to be expected, outrage as people discuss it should not be. Not in 2014.
What strikes me as curious is that people who are outraged at the reporting of a tragedy involving someone they knew are often the same people who, without apology, watch TMZ or follow online or on television the details of scandalous, lurid or tragic events that involve celebrities or people they don't know. Tiger Woods. Casey Anthony. Robin Williams. Lacy Peterson. What's the difference?
The answer is, there is no difference. News is news, whether it is local or national. People seem to forget that in the 1920s and 1930s, graphic photos of slain gangsters were often published on the front page of the newspaper. Top dollar was paid for photos of Marilyn Monroe's body being loaded into a hearse and Elvis lying in his casket. Scandal and tragedy has always been reported in the media, whether local, national or global. That can't be censored just because the story is about someone who happens to live across town instead of in Los Angeles or Memphis.
While I understand the emotions involved in people asking for privacy after an event like this are real and are often inspired by a state of shock or grief, that must be tempered by the realization that people want to know what happened and the story will be told, no matter how tragic, no matter how much we wish it wasn't true. In an age when we daily use social media to invite people, often people we barely know, into everything from the minutiae to the details of our lives, we shouldn't be surprised when Facebook or the online comment section of the newspaper becomes the proverbial water cooler at which the latest gossip is batted about like a badminton birdie. Even if it involves someone we know. We shouldn't be surprised. Not in 1930, and certainly not in 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment