In Defense of NBC News (Please Don't Banish Me From the Blog)

Special Commentary by Barry Garron

If you continue reading you will find something both impolite and unpopular. So be warned.

It’s impolite because I am a guest here, appearing at the invitation of my friend and colleague Ray Richmond. Good guests shouldn’t publicly disagree with their hosts. It’s unpopular because every survey I’ve ever seen on the subject, including one taken within my household, places me squarely in the minority.

Nevertheless, it’s my opinion that NBC News was correct in televising the material sent to it by multiple murderer Cho Seung-Hui. There’s room to disagree over the way the photos and videos were presented, and how often, but on the larger issue, I think NBC News was right to do what it did.

If we examine the reasons given by Ray and other thoughtful critics, they come down to four points. By televising the Virginia Tech killer’s photos and videos, NBC News: 1. encouraged other lunatics to initiate their own murder sprees, 2. failed to provide anything new, educational or instructive, 3. improperly insinuated itself into the story and 4. endorsed the ravings of a madman.

Let’s take each point, one by one. First, regarding whether NBC News inspired other maniacs, the truth is none of us really knows what sets off a violent rampage. Most of the time, it seems to be anger in the workplace or at school, not a desire for posthumous infamy. Some say killings like the Virginia Tech massacre are the result of violence in movies, video games and the culture in general.

Not a day goes by without TV and newspaper reports about people who commit all sorts of violent acts. Some of these criminals have been the subjects of films and docudramas. Does this lead to more mayhem? If you ask me, the part of the reporting most likely to set off another killing spree was the news of how easy it was for Cho to get his weapons. It’s a complex topic and blaming news coverage is overly simplistic.

Did NBC’s broadcast of Cho’s video help us to better understand Cho’s state of mind, as NBC News president Steve Capus maintained. We could argue all day about this. Ray and others say it didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. I found some insight into the nature of the mental disease that launched such an evil attack. In such cases, I think it best to come down on the side of providing more information, not less.

There is no question that NBC News, in televising materials that came to it unsolicited, became part of the story. So what’s new? Like it or not, that’s how it’s been done for years, particularly in broadcast journalism. From Edward R. Murrow right up to “60 Minutes,” TV journalists have been part of many stories they report. Indeed, NBC’s own “Dateline,” in which the news division sets traps for potential internet predators, involves a far greater level of involvement with a story. If anything, that’s where the debate should begin.

Finally, it is argued that by broadcasting Cho’s materials, NBC News endorsed them. We know better. The simple truth is that newspapers print and broadcasters show many speeches and documents to better inform the public. It is well-understood that, whether it’s footage of President Bush or North Korea’s Kim Il Jong, or whether it’s a story about Don Imus or Mel Gibson, the mere broadcast of objectionable material does not imply endorsement.

As for NBC News’ decision to place its logo on Cho’s material before distributing it to other outlets, that was uncalled for. Responsible news organizations would credit NBC News. In any case, stories about the material were sufficiently widespread to eliminate any doubt as to the source. The logo added an element to the video that was a distraction at best and an annoying self-promotion at worst.

Let’s be clear on one other point. I don’t believe that, when it comes to news, anything goes. For instance, I think broadcasters should withhold pictures of victims of crime and accidents. This should be done for practical reasons and because these people did not seek to call attention to themselves by their actions. There are other exceptions, as well, but the Cho video isn’t one of them.

In this age of spin and manipulation, there is a far greater danger from images that are hidden from us than from those made available for our possible edification. Images can be powerful, as the government officials who banned photographers from shooting coffins returned from Iraq know full well. I’d rather exercise that power myself than have others decide what’s best for me to see.