Another shooting in america

[johnny on the spot]

Anyone else feel slightly uncomfortable with news networks interviewing as many child witnesses as they can get hold of in the immediate aftermath? These kids are all under ten years old and have been involved in the worst school massacre in their nation's history. Are they also fair game for haranguing by journalists the minute they get outside the school gates?

It's absolutely disgusting. And if parents are allowing it then I don't know what to say. Maybe I'm being cynical, but I can see some of the parents saying "Look, you're on the tele" in five years time. It definitely doesn't bring a warm feeling in the cockles of your heart.

Even the BBC were happy to broadcast these interviews last night. The kids I saw interviewed had so blatantly just all had their hair brushed for the cameras.

God knows how Sky's Kay Burley would have behaved.

 

[Mdr]

Anyone else feel slightly uncomfortable with news networks interviewing as many child witnesses as they can get hold of in the immediate aftermath? These kids are all under ten years old and have been involved in the worst school massacre in their nation's history. Are they also fair game for haranguing by journalists the minute they get outside the school gates?

It's absolutely disgusting. And if parents are allowing it then I don't know what to say. Maybe I'm being cynical, but I can see some of the parents saying "Look, you're on the tele" in five years time. It definitely doesn't bring a warm feeling in the cockles of your heart.

Even the BBC were happy to broadcast these interviews last night. The kids I saw interviewed had so blatantly just all had their hair brushed for the cameras.

God knows how Sky's Kay Burley would have behaved.

To be fair to those involved, God knows how you'd react in that situation. I'd imagine most of the parents could barely see straight, never mind think straight, and as for the reporters, it's awful, but they were doing their jobs like everyone else. I imagine they were as disturbed by what happened as everyone else on the scene.
Now isn't the time for criticisim.

 

[acquiesce]

Even the BBC were happy to broadcast these interviews last night. The kids I saw interviewed had so blatantly just all had their hair brushed for the cameras.

God knows how Sky's Kay Burley would have behaved.

To be fair to those involved, God knows how you'd react in that situation. I'd imagine most of the parents could barely see straight, never mind think straight, and as for the reporters, it's awful, but they were doing their jobs like everyone else. I imagine they were as disturbed by what happened as everyone else on the scene.
Now isn't the time for criticisim.

I'm sorry, it's tasteless. There should be a line. You can report a story without involving children that at best are traumatized and probably have no idea what's going on anyways. A bit of a buffer zone and family time would be good. Not shining bright lights in their faces and having strangers asking them 20 questions.

 

[TFC]

They have released the names and ages of the victims, no need at all to post them of course. Really really sad to see so many kids aged just 6 and 7 on that list.

Not really a religious person but I hope there actually is a hell so that cowardly little **** can rot in it.

 

[another generation]

Anyone else feel slightly uncomfortable with news networks interviewing as many child witnesses as they can get hold of in the immediate aftermath?

Have they been asked the classic, 'How do you feel?'?

 

[Mdr]

Even the BBC were happy to broadcast these interviews last night. The kids I saw interviewed had so blatantly just all had their hair brushed for the cameras.

God knows how Sky's Kay Burley would have behaved.

To be fair to those involved, God knows how you'd react in that situation. I'd imagine most of the parents could barely see straight, never mind think straight, and as for the reporters, it's awful, but they were doing their jobs like everyone else. I imagine they were as disturbed by what happened as everyone else on the scene.
Now isn't the time for criticisim.

I'm sorry, it's tasteless. There should be a line. You can report a story without involving children that at best are traumatized and probably have no idea what's going on anyways. A bit of a buffer zone and family time would be good. Not shining bright lights in their faces and having strangers asking them 20 questions.

Ya it could have been done better, and I don't think they should have been involved in it, but at the end fo the day, they were there, in an awful sitution, and they did what they thought they should do.
I'm sure they'll think about it more when time passes. They were doing what theythought was right. I doubt any of them went out there to be malicious or exploit anyone.
They did what they thought they had to do, and I'm sure they were effected by the sitution as well. They didn't know what to do. Would you?

It's like this picture.

It's an amazing picture, and it won an prestigious award but the photographer killed himself shortly after recieving the award. He recieved so much criticism for doing nothing, he also thought he could have done more, but many saw him as just another vulture.
The images and the reactions haunted him, he believed that he could have done more, and all of this drove him to suicide.

It's about reacting in an instant, you make a choice and they'll have to deal with it. Seeing some of the interviews, the reporters were almost as upset as the people being interviewed. What were they supposed to do?
There was nothing normal about that day, so there was no normal procedure to follow. People did their best, what they thought was right.

 

[acquiesce]

To be fair to those involved, God knows how you'd react in that situation. I'd imagine most of the parents could barely see straight, never mind think straight, and as for the reporters, it's awful, but they were doing their jobs like everyone else. I imagine they were as disturbed by what happened as everyone else on the scene.
Now isn't the time for criticisim.

I'm sorry, it's tasteless. There should be a line. You can report a story without involving children that at best are traumatized and probably have no idea what's going on anyways. A bit of a buffer zone and family time would be good. Not shining bright lights in their faces and having strangers asking them 20 questions.

Ya it could have been done better, and I don't think they should have been involved in it, but at the end fo the day, they were there, in an awful sitution, and they did what they thought they should do.
I'm sure they'll think about it more when time passes. They were doing what theythought was right. I doubt any of them went out there to be malicious or exploit anyone.
They did what they thought they had to do, and I'm sure they were effected by the sitution as well. They didn't know what to do. Would you?

It's like this picture.

It's an amazing picture, and it won an prestigious award but the photographer killed himself shortly after recieving the award. He recieved so much criticism for doing nothing, he also thought he could have done more, but many saw him as just another vulture.
The images and the reactions haunted him, he believed that he could have done more, and all of this drove him to suicide.

It's about reacting in an instant, you make a choice and they'll have to deal with it. Seeing some of the interviews, the reporters were almost as upset as the people being interviewed. What were they supposed to do?
There was nothing normal about that day, so there was no normal procedure to follow. People did their best, what they thought was right.

Sad as it is to say, it actually is a kind of normal procedure these days in the United States.

 

[Wretched Vengeance]

That picture stopped me in my track's.

 

[jared]

They should have the gun nuts on the news displaying their impressive arsenal.

 

[SWP's back]

To be fair to those involved, God knows how you'd react in that situation. I'd imagine most of the parents could barely see straight, never mind think straight, and as for the reporters, it's awful, but they were doing their jobs like everyone else. I imagine they were as disturbed by what happened as everyone else on the scene.
Now isn't the time for criticisim.

I'm sorry, it's tasteless. There should be a line. You can report a story without involving children that at best are traumatized and probably have no idea what's going on anyways. A bit of a buffer zone and family time would be good. Not shining bright lights in their faces and having strangers asking them 20 questions.

Ya it could have been done better, and I don't think they should have been involved in it, but at the end fo the day, they were there, in an awful sitution, and they did what they thought they should do.
I'm sure they'll think about it more when time passes. They were doing what theythought was right. I doubt any of them went out there to be malicious or exploit anyone.
They did what they thought they had to do, and I'm sure they were effected by the sitution as well. They didn't know what to do. Would you?

It's like this picture.

It's an amazing picture, and it won an prestigious award but the photographer killed himself shortly after recieving the award. He recieved so much criticism for doing nothing, he also thought he could have done more, but many saw him as just another vulture.
The images and the reactions haunted him, he believed that he could have done more, and all of this drove him to suicide.

It's about reacting in an instant, you make a choice and they'll have to deal with it. Seeing some of the interviews, the reporters were almost as upset as the people being interviewed. What were they supposed to do?
There was nothing normal about that day, so there was no normal procedure to follow. People did their best, what they thought was right.

Sorry mate but that story about that picture is simply not true at all, nor the reason for his suicide.

The parents of the children were busy taking food from the plane, so they had left their children only briefly while they collected the food. This was the situation for the girl in the photo taken by Carter. A vulture landed behind the girl. To get the two in focus, Carter approached the scene very slowly so as not to scare the vulture away and took a photo from approximately 10 metres. He took a few more photos before chasing the bird away.

And his suicide note read more like his lack of cash was the main driver:

I am depressed ... without phone ... money for rent ... money for child support ... money for debts ... money!!! ... I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings and corpses and anger and pain ... of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners ... I have gone to join Ken

Also, if you take a look at his work, he took far more harrowing pictures than that of the child/vulture (which actually had a happy ending with the parents not 5 feet away behind the camera collecting food) which would have been more likely to make him depressed.