---

---

Published: May 02, 2007
By Wesley Hester

Last week’s school lockdowns in Goochland are just two examples of the immediate effects of the tragedy at Virginia Tech.

Similar incidents in Charlottesville and Amelia County only reinforce that the public is on edge, and understandably so. But has an isolated incident and freak occurrence made people overly sensitive and unnecessarily frightened? Possibly. Is the media’s coverage partially to blame? Probably. 

It could easily be argued that the shootings at Virginia Tech were “over-covered” by the media. Certainly an atrocity of that scale warrants serious scrutiny and examination. Mission accomplished there thus far. Even the disturbing images of the shooter that NBC released might not have been totally devoid of value, and clearly the rest of that information — because it will be a major part of the investigation — needed to be available to the public.

But did everything need to be as “in your face” as it was? Certainly not.

As a member of the media I often want to defend my brethren, but I sometimes feel embarrassed or ashamed when I see something that I feel underestimates the public’s intelligence or seems unapologetically sensationalist in nature.  I have felt that way for more than two weeks watching much of the coverage of the Tech incident.

Don’t get me wrong, some news sources got it right, and did it right — with respect and sensitivity. But most did not.

One couldn’t help but feel that many of the major networks and some newspapers were almost excited that they had a story of this magnitude to report on. From the background music and video montages to the incessant comparisons and overuse of buzzwords, it was totally overboard. It was beyond pervasive. It was inappropriate.

There were reporters in students’ faces every single day since the shootings, swarming and inundating them with questions the day they returned to class. Even the families, the funerals and memorial services weren’t spared. While there is undoubtedly value in conveying the reactions of those directly affected, lines need to be drawn and observed. 

There’s something to be said for reporting the facts, and there will be no shortage of those by the time this thing is said and done. Hopefully from those some lessons will be learned and maybe tragedies prevented in the future.

But did the relentless coverage of the Tech incident serve any real purpose? I think not. If anything, I think it’s served to oversaturate a public that would’ve already been on edge.

---