NBC News Can't Easily Wash This Blood From Its Hands

I've taken a little bit of time trying to find just the right words to describe my feelings about NBC News' decision on Wednesday to air the sick video diatribe from Virginia Tech mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui and then make it available for its network competition. Here are the words I've come up with: irresponsible, unenlightening, self-serving, immoral, vainglorious, unprofessional.

I quite frankly cannot believe that NBC News president Steve Capus thinks anyone is going to buy his disingenuous justification that the network felt it had "an obligation to give people a glimpse inside the mind of this killer." Um, actually, no, it didn't. In fact, it had precisely the opposite obligation: to refrain from doing anything that might inspire future homicidal whack jobs from thinking they could go out in a blaze of publicity-rich glory. By choosing to satisfy its own ego and ratings needs over public safety, the network shamefully compromised its journalistic integrity and callously fumbled its responsibility to viewers. Period.

Now let's just think about this for a second. What did we actually learn from the hateful spew that ran from this twisted dirtbag's lips and the photographs of him narcissistically posing with his pistols? Not a whole helluva lot. Yeah, he proved to be manic, angry, ranting, crazed, paranoid. I'm guessing most people weren't too surprised to discover this. We weren't much expecting soft spoken, sweet, gentle.

Seeing and hearing a crazy man in the throes of homicidal meltdown is somehow educational? Valuable? Instructive? No. It was simply what it was: brazen sensationalism ludicrously couched as insight, which is quite the load of crap. I watched this stuff and felt I didn't know this lunatic any better than I did before, but I did feel significantly dirtier for the experience. It didn't do anything to answer the question of "Why?".

This, however, didn't stop NBC News from issuing a statement today in which it claimed to have aired the Cho story and the accompanying materials that arrived via overnight mail "with extreme sensitivity." Oh really? Sensitivity to Cho's distribution needs? On that score, mission accomplished.

I can also bash the other networks for picking up the ball that NBC inflated and running portions of the video themselves. But it's NBC News that decided to copy the stuff before turning it over to the FBI out of some wholly misguided need to toss itself into the middle of a story it had no business being in. And in that way, this episode very much represents a tipping point in TV news crime coverage.

The only people who learned anything from NBC's screening of the video and posting of the pix are the mentally ill and psychotic in our midst. They found that going out hunting humans for sport and crafting videos and a sicko manifesto in support can turn you into a media superstar. This is not a wise message for television to be transmitting, however unintentional. It positively lays the groundwork for emulation, and for the network to claim otherwise is simply insincere.

NBC was wholly complicit in the promotion of a serial murderer's agenda to the point that it essentially endorsed his nutzo materials as a virtual co-production. All that Cho lacked was the funding and distribution deal for his rambling blather, and NBC was kind enough to supply it free of charge.

It even made sure the peacock logo was on the video and photos for view when it was broadcast and/or published by others. Yes -- NBC News was careful to brand the equivalent of a snuff video! Yikes. I mean, let's contrast this with the network coverage of 9/11 and the correct decision not to show those jumping to their deaths from the World Trade Center. Here, it copies off Cho's unfiltered outrage before passing the stuff along to the FBI...and then runs it that very evening on the nightly news without so much as a disclaimer.

I completely agree with forensic psychiatrist Michael Wellner, who ABC's Good Morning America this morning called the release of the tape a "social catastrophe." He added, "This is a PR tape of (Cho) trying to turn himself into a Quentin Tarantino character. It's precisely what he would have wanted. And what does it reveal? It reveals what he wants us to see, not who he really is."

The backlash against the running of the video already has begun. As it should. NBC News screwed the pooch big time on this one, and the organization will be very fortunate if a copycat killer doesn't come along to rub its collective noses in this debacle. This wasn't even a tough call but a no-brainer. At least now we know what the mind of a reckless and self-involved news organization looks like. And to be sure, if they have TV reception in Hell, we know that Cho Seung-Hui has a smile on his face today.

Comments

[Fred Farrar]

Beautifully written, Ray.

Just as the networks correctly made the decision on 9/11 not to show us the final sad moments of thos epeople jumping from the World Trade Center, they should not have shown us the rantings of this psycho.

The endless "Exclusive" notations, and the haste to get it all on MSNBC were just as bad.

I think in short order this will make journalism classes forget all about "Dateline" blowing up that truck back in the day.

And one more note no one seems to be mentioning:

Journalists traditionally guard their material with every fiber before giving it up to the police.

So how in the future does NBC News ever refuse to supply any governmental authority with its material when it so quickly and freely gave this up?

(I agree they should have -- probably without using it -- but has a short-sighted and obviously addled NBC News executive corps made a major mistake which will haunt all journalists in the future?)

I think so.

I would hope no one at NBC News ever, ever publicly sneers at anyone else's journalistic standards in the future.

[Lance Mazmanian]

You've nailed it again, Ray.

While glad that Cho's PR package unquestionably confirms that he was completely, destructively mentally ill (and that he should *not* have been walking around in the land of the un-institutionalised), the network in question didn't release the pics and video as a ritual of understanding, public discourse, altruism, or whatever other kind/studious excuses they've offered as dressing.

No, this was an Entertainment News item they simply could *not* resist: They saw the ratings on the wall and went completely cuckoo, like a bear who's found a car-sized beehive.

The network may ultimately discover they've lost more than gained from this "public service". Especially if, as you mention, a copycat decides to find his place on the stage from seeing Cho's celebrity spreading unchecked.

And like the bear mentioned above, the network may find the first swarms of angry little bees to be irrelevant, and/or harmless...

But that's a mighty *big* hive they've cracked.

Lot of bees in there.

L.

[Scott Nelson]

And yet you have multiple screen captures of the guy in your blog entry. It just seems hypocritical of you to bash NBC News (whom I'm not a fan of, by the way) and then use their pictures too. Your entry didn't need any pictures. We've seen them.

[anonymous]

You posting the photos with the guns from the same tainted "multimedia manifesto" is somehow different, though? Please explain.

[Sammy]

I don't think NBC should have released the still photographs because they flatter the gunman by making him seem tough and cool and frightening.

However, the accompanying video clips fail as propaganda. Instead of achieving their intended effect, Cho's rambling recitation of an incoherent manifesto reveals the image of an insane and irrational person. A person meriting pity and mockery, not admiration. For me as a viewer, the knowledge that the person capable of such evil was also mentally disturbed is almost comforting.

Had NBC only showed excerpts of the clips without the posed glamour shots, then I don't think they would have risked encouraging copy-cat violence.

[joe rhodes]

Ray, this rarely happens, but I completely disagree with you on this. If the crux of your objection is that NBC overplayed its hand-wringing over the matter and veered into sanctimony, then okay. But as a news organization that had this material dropped in their lap, they absolutely HAD to show it. There's not an editor/ producer in the world who would have done otherwise. If that package had showed up at the Hollywood Reporter, addressed to you, would you not have immediately shown it to your editors? And would they not have posted it? Of course, they would.

We are in the news business. Well, you and I are on the somewhat loony fringe of the news business, but finding and sharing information is still the crux of our job. News is not always pleasant. But this had to be released and, I suspect, we will eventually have access to the material which NBC chose not to release. My only complaint is that they didn't make all of it publicly available. They didn't have to broadcast all of it, but they needed to put it out there.

To say they should have withheld the material because it glorifies the killer is the same as arguing that criminals aren't entitled to a vigorous defense in court.

Considering their bombshell news value, I think NBC did the right thing and should be applauded for not hyping it any more than they did.

[Kevin]

NBC is having a hell of a month. First it was David Gregory and Brian Williams cutting up with Karl Rove at the Radio & TV Correspondents' Dinner (Brian Williams burped to the tune of 'Battle Hymn of the Republic'; think about that for a minute, and imagine what would have happened had Katie Couric done the same thing).

Then Imus, which was the frathouse hangout for Gregory, Andrea Mitchell, Craig Crawford, and a raft of NBC correspondents - particularly when they had a book to peddle.

And now this.

NBC has been more and more well-regarded in media circles because of two things: the success of Williams (CBS and ABC haven't been able to come up with their own voices of authority since Rather and Jennings departed) and the rise of Keith Olbermann, whose show is the closest thing that the major networks have to "The Daily Show."

Media people tend to look at those two successes and ignore the bigger picture. It's not that NBC is necessarily partisan; it's just that its anchors and correspondents have gotten dangerously close to the powerful people they're supposed to be covering. It's no surprise that the wacko sent his package to them and not another broadcast network, and - given their obvious lack of moral and news compass - it's even less of a surprise that they'd air it even as they spent hours wringing their hands on air over its propriety.

Keep these tapes in mind the next time the news division airs Episode 568 of "To Catch a Predator" and salivates over every disgusting chat message that a pedophile sends to a decoy. Their tinny excuses about the greater good are sounding increasingly tinny and thin.

[Ray Richmond]

Re my decision to run on the blog the offending photos of Seung-Hui Cho that I so chastise NBC for broadcasting, I offer the following short explanations:

1. I don't believe it the same offense as NBC but closer to apples and oranges. I am commenting on the pictures on an entertainment trade blog rather than using them in a sensational fashion on a mainstream broadcast news network, to my mind. I am using them to illustrate a larger "covering the coverage" point.

2. As I discussed NBC's attaching its logo to many of the photographs and thereby "branding" them, I thought it salient to show examples here (as two of them are). One could make the point that the photo of Cho at the very top of the post was unnecessary, but I again argue that it goes to the idea of illustrating a larger point rather than sensationalizing a story that required no more sensationalization.

3. But I can respect the point made by Scott Nelson and Anonymous that I was guilty of a crime similar to that against which I was railing. I simply disagree. However, I appreciate the feedback very much, and no doubt others might well agree with them.

[Lance Mazmanian]

Ray!

Taking a cue from an above poster, I'm actually very curious: What *if* that sad, deranged bastard *had* sent the stuff to you...?

What might you have done?

L.

[Ray Richmond]

Lance and Joe:

Had the psycho sent me the package of photos, videos and writings rather than to NBC News, here is what I would like to think I'd have done: written a story describing the contents in detail.

Would I have been tempted to publish the pix and post the video on the Hollywood Reporter website? Absolutely. Would I have fought with my bosses to make sure it didn't happen? Also absolutely. Would I have won that fight? Hmmm...Let me think...No. I probably would have been outvoted.

Am I being insincere when I write this? I hope not. But at the same time I admit the temptation to publish the whole shebang would have been overwhelming. No question. That's why NBC's justification rings so hollow. It had nothing to do with the greater public good or a "publish or perish" press freedom imperative. It was business. Duh.

[pam barrett]

This was a terrible thing for NBC to put on the T.V. I was so disgusted with the whole thing.
This was such a tragic moment in many people's lives and they bombard the T.V. with the vile face of death, "Cho".
I saw Dr Weiner with Bill O'Reilly and all he did was try and shut the Dr. up and deny that it was wrong to show this so called "News" on T.V.
They gave "Cho" the last word, just like he wanted -- and to go out in a blaze of glory.
Pam

[Lori]

Here's an interesting commentary posted to MSNBC.com about how the Cho tapes should NOT have been aired:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18220512/?from=ET

[Theodora]

:::::siiiiiiiiiiiigh:::

This time of year is fast becoming equated with Dick Cheney ShootEmUp mentality.

The tragedy being compounded by the never ending loops, hashing and rehashing what'd transpired --as if it would make things better.

Why would anyone be surprised that the major outlets would beat this to a bloody pulp???? There's no such thing as "...journalistic integrity..." these days. It's ALL about ratings.

The inappropriateness of all three networks rushing to the finish line to put microphones in peoples' faces --not keeping respectful distance to allow people to absorb how their lives were impacted...

:::hearing Don Henley singing "Dirty Laundry" in the background, in notso sotto voce:::

The idiotic statement, implying that the dossier sent to NBC was "...made just before he went on his rampage..." cut even deeper. Did they think Cho ran directly to KINKo's to make his press kit? Does the word: PREMEDITATED mean anything to anyone in the media anymore???

Saddest, albeit sardonic commentary was issued by the CRAParazzi 'info-tainment' shows --taking the news outlets to task... As if wearing a suit makes those vultures any better than the peoople they're harpooning. Especially since their stock in trade is **daily** character assassinations.

:::uploading some Doxidan --and a high colonic hose:::

Maybe we can finally get the media to clear their bloodlust shit out of the communication colon once and for all --and return to a world where logic outweighs lunacy...

Yeah...

"You may say I'm a dreamer...
but I'm not the only one..."