By: Megan White
To any American news junkie, the summer of 2012 was turning out to be two months of Syria, heat waves, and Bain Capital. But then, on July 20, the presses halted and the talking heads were silenced as a tragic new story seized the airwaves. At 12:38 that morning, 24 year-old James Eagan Holmes entered a crowded movie theater and opened fire, killing 12 people and injuring 58 others. Though authorities apprehended the gunman within seven minutes, his shots would continue to ring through every major news and social network for days to come.
In the time it took to hit “post,” millions of Americans across the country had learned the story of the Aurora massacre, its perpetrator, and its victims. Reporters tagged along behind the police every step of the way, seizing on each detail of the case until they could offer readers and viewers a complete recounting of the traumatic event. Within hours, analysis of the shooting had become the primary focus of 24-hour news coverage. James Holmes became a reviled household name while stories of the victims’ strength and courage warmed hearts in living rooms from Florida to Washington.
From here, however, tragedy turned into talking points. As the steady stream of new details began to slow, networks on all sides of the spectrum scrambled to fill airtime with discussions over deviant behavior, gun control, and the effects of both on the 2012 election. “Exclusive” interviews with the killer’s parents’ neighbors’ cousin and commentaries by gun shop owners from Kodiak, Alaska began to overshadow the true story of what happened in Aurora and to chip away at the solemnity of the massacre. What had once been a story approached with only the utmost respect and heartbroken disbelief had become fuel in the prime time fire; the story of a tragedy had become a tragedy in and of itself.
For roughly 15 years, Americans have found themselves under the spell of the 24-hour news cycle. The era of Anderson Cooper, Glenn Beck, and Rachel Maddow has given rise to a culture that demands every possible angle of a story, and then some. Events such as the death of Whitney Houston and the Casey Anthony Trial spurned weeklong, if not month-long televised investigations in which reporters chased down every available scrap of information, no matter how trivial or minute. To producers at networks such as CNN, FOX, and MSNBC, reporting the news means finding a way to keep ratings up by engaging viewers 24 hours a day, seven days a week, resulting in a constant quest to fill time. In some cases, interviews with people only slightly connected to the story, consultations with “expert” panels, and emotional soliloquies by the network anchors take the place of the actual story and its facts.
That is not to say that the Aurora massacre was undeserving of such a high level of attention. A well-informed public is better able to show support to the victims and their families and more wary of risks to its own safety. But the focus of the news coverage should have been just that: the victims and their families and how to avoid similar events in the future, not the perpetrator’s favorite cereal or the presidential candidates’ secretaries’ assistants’ stances on gun control.
In addition to dampening the effect of such sobering stories, the 24-hour news phenomenon carries heavier implications. Immediately following the shooting, armed police officers established a heavy presence at movie theaters across the country. Both AMC and Regal Cinemas have cracked down on customers wearing costumes and other character attire, and two theaters in New Orleans have made a practice of patting down individuals as they enter the complex. Three potential “copycat” killers have been arrested in Arizona, Maine, and California as public anxiety remains at an all-time high, and gun sales in Colorado have soared, with background checks up 41 percent. In light of the constant coverage of the story and James Holmes’ newfound “stardom,” authorities worry that potential killers in search of attention will adopt similar measures.
As noted criminologist James Alan Fox asked in a blog posting, “How often must we see the alleged murderer’s name in print and his face shown in photographs from happier times? It is perfectly reasonable to shed light on the tragic event without a media spotlight on the alleged assailant. It is shameless, if not dangerous, to transform an obscure individual into an infamous somebody who may be revered and admired by a few folks on the fringe.” Fox suggests that the media should limit the amount of information reported about criminal suspects, as is the practice in other countries, where victims and suspects’ names are shielded until after a trial. Transforming a killer into a larger-than-life icon only serves to put the public at a greater risk while adding insult to injury for the victims.
While a constant bombardment of news may serve to make viewers more aware, it often does so at the expense of public safety. But as long as there are 24 hours in the day, major news networks will continue to walk the fine line between trivial information and education.
