Aurora Shooting Raises Questions, Should Suspected Killer James Holmes Be Blackballed By Media?
The James Holmes/Joker connection after the Aurora shooting has fascinated a horrified public after a spree killing — for which Holmes is assumed to be responsible — killed 12 theater-goers at a midnight screening late last week.
James Holmes has been suspiciously quiet since the murders, appearing subdued or even drugged at his first court hearing on Monday in relation to the shocking spree murder.
No one knows why James Holmes affected a Joker-like appearance and shot up a group of innocent individuals out to see a new summer movie, but speculation has been rife — that he was unemployed, that he had been rejected by women, that he was a member of the Tea Party or Occupy movements and his lashing out was a natural progression.
What many believe, however, is that Holmes was motivated in part by a desire for notoriety — and after all, had he just been bloodthirsty, he could have committed far more murders in a less theatrical way and evaded capture far longer.
Which has prompted an interesting question in the media — should suspected killers such as James Holmes be thwarted in receiving attention in the media in the days following a massacre?
In the US, arrests are a matter of public record, and the job of the media is to report upon an incident factually with information available at press time. But in a world eerily foreshadowed by the film Natural Born Killers nearly 20 years ago, crime and notoriety are a sickening form of fame in our social media-driven world — akin to the similar issue of criminals profitting financially off their crimes via book and movie deals.
Leading the charge to funnel ill-gotten fame away from suspected killer Holmes in the media is the brother of one of the first victims to be identified in the media, aspiring sports writer Jessica Redfield’s sibling Jordan Ghawi. Ghawi even implored President Obama to cease using Holmes’ name, a plea he says the President was amenable to when meeting with victims’ families in Colorado:
@ksatnews Please keep to the same level of accountability as the POTUS and others in not speaking the shooter’s name or posting images
— Jordan Ghawi (@JordanGhawi) July 23, 2012
The shooter has something to say and we empower him and those like him when we give him this attention.
— Jordan Ghawi (@JordanGhawi) July 23, 2012
Anders Breivik killed 77 in Oslo so that his voice could be heard in the form of his manifesto. Let us stop providing platforms for them.
— Jordan Ghawi (@JordanGhawi) July 23, 2012
Instead of the villain, focus on three heroes who died that night protecting the ones they love: John Blunk. Matt McQuinn, & Alex Teves.
— Jordan Ghawi (@JordanGhawi) July 23, 2012
Ghawi is not alone in his belief that Holmes should remain nameless in the media and rot alone in solitary confinement — Fark’s Drew Curtis proposed that instead of fearful regard, Holmes be mocked with a humorous moniker referring to a failed bad guy:
The Aurora killer wanted to be a supervillain. I suggest we all start calling him Sideshow Bob to deny him the one thing he wanted
— DrewCurtis (@DrewCurtis) July 23, 2012
Of course, the flip side of such a suggestion is purity of reporting. While Holmes may indeed have sought infamy in carrying out the killings, it is a matter of fact and record that he is the prime suspect, and a matter of public interest to determine the facts of such a horrific crime in hopes ordinary citizens can be best informed about such events.
Do you think that the media should largely ignore the perpetrators of high-profile crimes that appear fame seeking, or does the public have a right to know what happened, for better or worse?
