I think that you are onto something here. We have to be careful not to assume there is causality just because it appears to exist, but it seems as though there have been enough good studies and research to suggest there is a statistically significant relationship between mass shootings and increased media coverage that tends to "glorify" shooters and show their face and name everywhere. On the surface, the idea certainly seems plausible.

There are probably many factors that can increase the chance of a mass shooting occuring. These factors include mental illness, poverty, radicalization (religous and political), availabilty and ease of purchasing of firearms, among others. I'm comfortable adding what you desribed in the OP to that list. I think it can influence someone to commit a mass shooting.

Addressing this problem will be very difficult. I am generally not okay with requiring the media to do anything or cover things in a certain way as I think that can lead into a dangerous relationship between the state and the freedom of press.

That said, I have witnessed a growing movement among people in the US to not acknowledge the shooter's name or photo, and I hope this movement grows. With each mass shooting, I see this idea brought up more and more. I'm not sure if we can ever fully solve this problem, but we should at least make efforts to criticize media outlets that parade around a shooter's name and photo 24/7 after an incident. We must hold our media up to higher journalistic standards of integrity, and not just on this issue.

On a personal level, I shall try and discuss this topic with others around me and encourage them to not share a shooter's name and photo after a mass shooting. I know it probably feels underwhelming that these might be the only sorts of small things that we can do, but perhaps it is a start. Thanks for writing this up, I was fascinated by the read.

Thanks for taking the time to read the OP!

I understand reservations about requiring the media to do X, Y, or Z. I'm not sure having some type of legislation would be effective, however, countries have formed guidelines regarding the media's reporting of suicide and have implored media outlets to become educated on the phenomenon. At the very least, I would love to see Congress follow this model and in conjunction with sociologists, criminologists, and media members come together to draft guidelines for media reporting of mass shootings. Media outlets would not be required to follow the guidelines, but I certainly think it would help, especially in terms of making the citizenry more educated on this phenomenon so that they could potentially play their part in supporting/critiquing the media. I too have seen an increase in my peer group of people being critical of the media sensationalizing the shooter, and plastering their name and photo everywhere. Although despite this being an increased opinion in my peer group, I still recognize that we overwhelmingly are the minority. I've also seen comments on the news media I follow on Facebook espousing this opinion too, and have seen them garner considerable amounts of "likes". I commented this same opinion on a Facebook post by Fusion, and it became one of the top comments, with over 350 likes on it, which was pretty cool.

I too don't think we'll ever completely solve this problem, but I do think it's worth addressing, and that there's different options available to us and the media as we go forward. Of course I would love to see the focus always be on the victims, their loved ones, and how to help them. However, I know part of the reporting will necessarily involve talking about the shooter. If and when this does occur, I would rather the media (and us citizens) use language like the "Orlando shooter", or even use his initials like O.M. in this case. If and when they use photos, they should do so sparingly, but also do so in a way where not only can people understand important/relevant demographic information regarding the shooter, but that the the photo of the shooter is partially obscured so as to reduce a sense of "fame".

Just as an example, I took this uncensored photo from a news story regarding the Orlando shooter, and created this:



This post was edited by Handcuffs on Jun 15 2016 10:13pm

I think I am Captain Hate. When everyone needs some hate, they come to me.



I look forward to your thoughts.

Aside from the Columbine Effect, the Roanoke Shooter and the Umpqua Community College shooter, there are other definitive examples where mass shooters have either been obsessed with past mass shooters and/or have directly referenced them by name.

The Sandyhook shooter, aside from having a series of developmental and mental issues, was also obsessed with mass shooters, and had essentially a database of information regarding them on his computer. This is an excerpt from the official report of the State’s Attorney for the Judicial District of Danbury, Connecticut.







Source: http://www.ct.gov/csao/lib/csao/Sandy_Hook_Final_Report.pdf

Time to post this again I guess.

That was a really good video! I like what the forensic psychiatrist said at the end there, especially.

media is just trying to make money off sensationalism, morals are secondary at best

I agree. The question becomes whether or not that sensationalist media reporting translates to inspiring future shooters.

It's been interesting to explore each individual mass shooting, and the associated shooter(s), to see if there are definitive examples where they directly reference past mass shooters.

This has been the case, with examples shown in this thread, so far among: Columbine copycats, the Roanoke shooter, the Umpqua Community College shooter, and the Sandy Hook shooter.

Now though, the Virginia Tech shooter can be added to this list, because the Virginia Tech shooter mailed a 23-page multimedia manifesto to NBC the day of the shooting. It contained a series of photographs and text, and here's an excerpt from that text in which he references the Columbine shooters:



Source: https://schoolshooters.info/sites/default/files/cho_manifesto_1.1.pdf

unfortunately people have decided that they want beautiful actors reading borderline tmzish type news and delivering serious news the same way rather than journalists with integrity

we barely even have mainstream journalists anymore. Our comedians are the only ones on the national stage that are taking shit seriously and they often are on point with reactions to these tragedies