Introduction
On April 16, 2007, the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia was violently shaken by two shooting incidents on campus, the severity of which caused this to be not just the most horrific school shooting but the “deadliest shooting rampage in American history”. 33 people were killed and many others were injured. The gunman was identified as Seung Hui Cho, who committed suicide. In this paper we attempt to discuss how the media played a major role in influencing public opinions and perceptions during this shocking episode, even to the extent of distracting public attention from the real substance and implications of such a tragedy (Hauser & O’Connor, 2007).
Main text
A year has passed since this event and it has become a common point of reference for people as they engage in endless debates about gun control and security issues in universities. As Brian Monahan, an assistant professor of sociology at Iowa State University opined that the media often makes events out into “public dramas”, which is a specific format in which news is organized and presented to viewers, and in this way, influences people’s understanding and ideas about these events. The characteristics of public drama are excessive coverage, and an emphasis on human elements such as drama (even melodrama at times) and emotions to engage the viewer and package the news into a story format. Hence, the media coverts an event such as the Virginia Tech massacre “like an episode of ‘Law and Order’ than a dispassionate investigation and nuanced assessment of the broader range of causes and consequences, which would be much more beneficial in the long run” (Virginia Tech anniversary following “public drama” script says Iowa State sociologist).
The media also portrayed this event in such a light so as to further their own gun-control agenda. Proponents of stricter gun-control regulations at the New York Times ran an editorial just a few hours after the tragedy asking for stricter gun control, an act which caused many to question whether the editorial had actually been written much earlier on and held for the optimum moment to print it. The editorial was titled “Eight Years After Columbine” and talked about how sympathy was not enough, and this was an alarming reminder of the necessity of stronger controls over these dangerous weapons. However, in the eagerness displayed by the Times editorialists to use this event to promote their “liberal agenda”, they neglected to state that Virginia Tech had an absolute ban on guns, and a strict policy regarding use of any such weapons, which in itself had made the news in 2006 as a student had written an article asking the public to help him attain the right to self-defense so that he does not have to depend on the government for his safety (Field, 2007). Such was the single-minded focus of the media on trying to influence the public in their quest to promote their liberal agenda that they neglected to mention the relevant facts which might render their argument invalid.
The media spectacle which followed the Virginia Tech shooting included local, national and international TV and radio channels as all of them ensured that their crews and reporters were present in Blacksburg, at what became “one of the most highly-saturated media sites of all time.” According to later estimates, the media frenzy was such that at one point, the site had more than 600 journalists and reporters, and at least five acres of satellite television equipment. All this media attention spawned many debates on the psychological and social dimensions and causes behind such an event, as well as gun regulations and control, campus safety and mental health concerns (Kellner, 2007).
However, the media has been more focused on the “dramatic” and “emotional” facets of this event, and not the real-life difficulties in issues relating to campus security. Media officials have tried to influence people to press for crime control-centered responses to this tragedy and while that is important, the media should have also included in public discussion the inherent problems in implementing security in university campuses which by their very nature encourage and promote intellectual and physical freedom. The TV drama that ensued this event did not cover the practical aspects, as it should have, keeping in mind the complexity and implications of such a horrifying incident (Kellner, 2007).
Summary
The media stressed more on “politicizing” the incident, with its constant mention of how the shooter was Asian American (even though he had moved to the U.S. when he was eight years old), and used this as a prime opportunity to boost their ratings, get more viewership and to further their own interests. The resulting spectacle often distracts the public from the real substance of the matter at hand. NBC’s decision to release the multimedia package Cho sent to the network’s New York headquarters between the two shootings had an upsetting effect on people closely impacted by this tragedy and police investigators stated that this material did not aid in their understanding of the person or his reasons for having conducted the shooting. This was an example of the media competing for attention and viewership while stripping news coverage of actual substance, and distracting the public from focusing on the real matters at hand, which warrant serious analysis and attention to prevent events such as the Virginia Tech massacre from becoming ubiquitous in American history (Kellner, 2007).
References
Field, Chris. “Media Spin Virginia Tech Tragedy to Push Gun Control.” The National Conservative Weekly. 2007. 63.14.
Hauser, Christine & O’Connor, Anahad. “Virginia Tech Shooting Leaves 33 Dead.” The New York Times. 2007. Web.
Kellner, Douglas. Media Spectacle and the “Massacre at Virginia Tech”. 2007. Web.
“Virginia Tech anniversary following “public drama” script says Iowa State sociologist”. 2008. Web.