There are recent posts in other threads which suggested that the media limit their coverage of mass shootings so that the shooter doesn't become glorified and "set a new high score" for others to top. This has been proposed at least going back to 2015 (
Newsweek), yet the media has still not changed their reporting style.
A video was posted which opened with a suggestion that perhaps the government should impose limitations on the press around mass shootings, and immediately there was an uproar about infringing on the first amendment rights of the media.
Here is a
link to the original video, "How to Stop The Media From Inspiring Killers", in its entirety. Don't make the same mistake that many in the media and others did and only watch some of the video-watch the entire video, it is only 4 minutes and 41 seconds long. And to be transparent, the host is with the NRA, but even if you disagree with the NRA, you should still watch this video to see how quickly the media is ready to rush to judge, condemn and erroneously report without all of the facts. Yes, facts DO matter.
The uproar and subsequent inflammatory tweets that followed were clearly based upon approximately the first 2 minutes and 48 seconds of the 4 minute 41 second video. The host clearly and unequivocally states at 3 minutes and 5 seconds that "hearing him advocate to limit anyone's first amendment rights
should anger you." And at 3 minutes 43 seconds
he vehemently disagrees with the government infringing on the media's first amendment rights just as he vehemently opposes the government from infringing upon the second amendment rights. "The constitution is the constitution, it is not an ala carte menu. All the amendments need to be respected to the same standard" (Colion Noir).
Here is the follow-up video (about 10 minutes long) (
link) which covers the uproar, and shows various tweets of people including the media (such as CNN) who were ready to state their opinions without even having viewed the entire content (in other words, to them FACTS DID NOT MATTER).
It would therefore appear that the media is going to continue to "glorify" these monsters, giving them the notoriety they seek, because of the media's first amendment right to do so. Don't touch the first amendment, but by all means erase the second. Perhaps David Hogg should call for a boycott of the media, since the media is throwing gasoline on the fire, potentially at the expense of the lives of more children.