Our Hysterical Media

By Laura James

I have three theories on why the mass media hypes certain types of true crime stories. First, certain kinds of cases hit our buttons and drive up viewership. Second, exaggerating a case to "historic" proportions makes the journalist feel more important, since it strokes the ego to think one is reporting on a history-shattering event. Third, whatever drives up ratings is likely to have a divisive political angle worth exploring for ratings the next day.

Every media outlet in the country is guilty of these sins. I can prove that. Outrageous sensationalism is most often associated with mass murders, especially those committed with a "semi-automatic weapon" (news flash: most guns are "semi-automatic"). Another kind of case that attracts a lot of hype, over-analysis and speculation is the family annihilator.

There are dozens of workplace shootings every year. We'll hear about one and only one, I'd guess, this year. Sadly, that recent massacre took place in a city that had experienced just such a madman's rampage decades ago. Very few news outlets bothered to mention that earlier incident. Why? They prefer to think of every story they cover as unprecedented and unique. Precedents spoil hype.

Here is more proof. The most respected media outlets in the United States sensationalize true crime stories to the point of making blatantly false statements for the sake of a great opening sentence.

The mass shooting at Virginia Tech was not even close to being the worst massacre in US history, or even the worst school massacre in US history. But it was hyped exactly as such by none other than these outlets. (I noted the exact quote in case the links expired, and many did.)

On the Virginia Tech massacre, every single statement a false one:

MSNBC - "the worst school massacre in US history"
ABC - George Stephanopoulos: "The worst campus massacre before Virginia Tech was back in the University of Texas in 1966."
Newsweek - "worst massacre in U.S. history"
Time - "the worst massacre in US history"
Baltimore Sun - "the worst school massacre in US history"
Los Angeles Times - "the worst school massacre in history"
Court TV Crime Library "the worst mass murder in American history," indeed! This is a particularly egregious and unforgivable error on a website that purports to offer encyclopedic treatment of historic crimes, including articles on the Bath massacre and Mountain Meadows.
New Jersey Star-Ledger - "America's worst campus massacre"
Atlanta Journal-Constitution - "worst campus massacre in US history"
New York Daily News - "the worst campus massacre in American history"
Troy Record - "the nation's worst massacre"
WorldNetDaily - "America's worst school massacre"
Campus Times - "worst school massacre in United States history"
Shreveport Times - "worst massacre in American history"
Asheville Citizen-Times "The worst massacre in U.S. history"
Janesville Gazette - "the worst massacre in US history"
Roanoke Times - "worst school massacre in US history"
Daily Titan - "worst massacre in US history"
Bakersfield Californian - "the worst massacre in the country's history."

You'd think the press would've remembered having to correct their reporting when they erroneously fluffed the Columbine massacre as the "worst ever." Oops - I assume too much - did they correct themselves?

For the record, the worst school massacre in U.S. history took place in Michigan. The worst massacre ever is more difficult to discern because of all of the horrific examples. There was never a need to exaggerate any of them.

* * *

Once a newspaper touches a story, the facts are lost forever, even to the protagonists.

--Norman Mailer

Tweet

Why Crime History Matters

by Laura James

Unfortunately, the media often errs badly in its crime reporting because some reporters don't know a thing about the history of crime. And I guess they're too lazy to look it up before speaking on the subject.

For some reason, the natural tendency is to make it up—and get it wrong.

And that's too bad, because many times, some historical perspective might inform any given situation.

One example everyone knows: the press has erred badly in its coverage of the JonBenét Ramsey case on one small but perhaps important detail.

"Sex murderers never leave ransom notes." That's what the experts told us in the JonBenét Ramsey case. For years, in fact, that "fact" has been repeated.

It's always dangerous to talk in absolutes when the subject is human behavior, but there you have it.

And it wasn't true. One has to wonder just how much this error colored early perceptions of the case.

William Heirens was a sex killer. He left a ransom note. He kidnapped a little girl from the bedroom of her family home in the middle of the night, and later raped and killed her. Then he went on to kill again.

His name should sound familiar. No other inmate alive in a U.S. prison today has served longer than William Heirens, who went to prison in 1946. That's sixty-two years, and counting, behind bars.

While the press often get their precedents messed up, another type of error is more common: the tendency of some reporters to grossly exaggerate the historical significance of an event that is already, in and of itself, a very shocking crime that requires no exaggeration.

Reporters covering the terrible shooting massacre at Virginia Tech in 2007 called it "the worst massacre in U.S. history." That's a verbatim quote from Newsweek and from Time and from many, many others. No adjectives were omitted. And it was just flat-out a misstatement of fact.

Was it hysteria that caused so many journalists to overstate the matter as they did? Really, "the worst massacre in U.S. history"?

Thirty-two people died at Virginia Tech (Wiki).

That is far less than the Oklahoma City bombing (168 victims), Wounded Knee (300 victims), Mountain Meadows Massacre (100+ victims), or 9/11 (2,998 victims).

Alas, the terrible shootings at Virginia Tech could not even be called the "worst school massacre in U.S. history," though dozens of media outlets in fact did call it that.

It wasn't. A sad record still stands. The worst school massacre in U.S. history remains the Bath School Massacre, which claimed 45 lives in 1927. Not everyone has forgotten them.

Tweet

The Biggest Election Crime of All

Hunt for Justice by Cynthia Hunt

President-elect Obama & a Bright Moment in History

We have a new president-elect, and now we will rally and support him. This underdog candidacy turned historic win is a time for all Americans to unite as Senator John McCain urged in his concession speech last night. Senator Barack Obama ran an inspirational race and clinched a monumental win to become the 44th President of the United States of America.

Post-Election Crime Investigations

Despite the hope of our new leader, there are serious questions to answer in the wake of this campaign. There are investigations in more than a dozen states into ACORN for alleged voter fraud. No doubt there will be investigations into the online fundraising efforts of the Obama and McCain campaigns. Many believe the fundraising over the Internet allowed individuals to give the campaigns more than the federal limit by using prepaid credit cards. Also, there were no mechanisms in place to stop foreigners from donating online and trying to influence the U.S. election.

The Election Crime that Will Go Unpunished

Any election crime is serious, but they all pale in comparison to what I believe in the biggest election crime of all. This crime was committed by that all-important 4th branch of government—the press. The crime—bias.

Our founding fathers instituted crucial First Amendment rights to ensure we had a free press to be the watchdog over government. Sadly today, the watchdog is often akin to a collegiate mascot cheering on one side.

Independent Research Proves Media Coverage is Biased

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, an independent research group, found that voters overwhelmingly believed that the media wanted Barack Obama to win the presidential election by a seventy percent margin. When voters believe the press is biased, the press has no credibility. Without credibility, the reporter’s ink is useless.

In another study, the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism found McCain received significantly more negative than positive coverage while the press treatment of Obama was somewhat more positive. When researchers studied all political stories during a certain time period, they found MSNBC to be the most biased for Senator Obama of any network or cable news station. (see graph)

SNL as the National Ombudsman?

The executive producer of Saturday Night Live didn’t need an independent study to tell him the press was blowing the election coverage. Lorne Michaels said in a recent interview “it did seem to us that the media were in something of a swoon for Obama.” During the primaries, SNL did a parody of the media’s love affair, uh-hum I mean coverage, of Obama. After that, the press buckled down a bit and started producing more revealing stories about Obama and his policies.

Has the world gone mad when SNL has to right a wrong media? I admit I am a bit old fashioned and idealistic about journalism, but when journalists must be shown how to do their job by comedy writers, I think it’s time for journalists to take a good long look at our work. (SNL parody of Obama Clinton Debates)

The Press Should Join Republicans in the Unemployment Line

President-elect Obama delivered a powerful and humble speech last night asking Americans to “summon a new spirit of responsibility.” I suggest journalists turn the spotlight on themselves.

News reports today will say that voters have given President-elect Obama a mandate for change and repudiated President George W. Bush and the Republicans. While those stories are valid, journalists should consider how we are doing our very important job in this democracy. If voters could have weighed in, they would have fired us too.

Tweet