If one were to contemplate all the horrible results of the actions of this murderous psychopath in Virginia, if one were to wonder how hard and emotional have become the lives of the survivors of those whom this sick individual killed, it would seem axiomatic that the Mainstream Media would be the last group such a reflection would see as a recipient of the "tough decisions" resulting from the murders . We would naturally feel pain at the loss of the families of the VT victims. Our hearts would go out to the turmoil that surviving students would face upon trying to resume their education schedules after this monumental outrage. We would even feel bad for residents of the surrounding Virginia communities as they attempt to cope with the crime. Yes, there are a lot of people to empathize with and to feel sorry for.
But the news media are not one of them.
The New York Times and NBC, today, have, however, seen this crime through the "tough decisions" they have had to make in their coverage, as much as placing themselves on the list of those who have been so horribly affected by this monstrous event.
The package that arrived yesterday at NBC headquarters in New York was almost immediately flagged as suspicious, because it had been mailed from Blacksburg, Va., and bore the return name A. Ismail.
The arrival in the mailroom set in motion intense decision making, much of it directed by Steve Capus, president of NBC News.
What self-indulgent tripe. That the NYT and NBC would equate their own jobs and lives to the emotional upheaval that victims of the VT shootings face is appalling. That the MSM would put themselves in the shoes of the victims and their survivors is insensible.
Are we supposed to feel sorry for these grave "decisions" that NBC had to make to air this killer's garbage? Are we supposed to pat them on the backs because they went through such anguish to decide if they would show this nut case's mental depravity on the air?
Are we supposed to doubt they really even thought they HAD a "tough" choice to make, or is it more likely that they stampeded straight to the TV screen with their precious video because it is such a hot story? Are we supposed to imagine they really did consider the moral implications of airing the video, or are we more likely to believe they really didn't consider any moral issue at all in their rush to air this sensationalism?
The whole story from the New York Times on the progression of decisions NBC supposedly went through is so self-reverentially overwrought with the gritty details of the efforts of the people who ostensibly had to agonize over this decision that it borders on the absurdly comic.
Who CARES how hard this decision was on those poor NBC executives? This foolish story just shows how the Media has decided that all stories start with them and how they feel and then proceeds from there.
In fact, the very reason they are publishing this story and trying to urge the public to the belief that the MSM agonized over this decision is because they understand that no one feels they truly do consider the moral implications of their actions in the first place. The MSM put this story out to try and essentially say "See, we DO care" and to steal a march on the cynicism the public feels about them.
Butt coverage, big time.
Couple this with the segment that Laura Ingraham had on her show yesterday where Matt Lauer seemed to be saying in his on location report on the Today Show that the VT students he found in a cafeteria there hadn't realized how "big" a story the incident was until they saw HIM walk into the room! As if these people needed Matt Lauer's presence to assure them that this story was "important".
All too often, our news is about those giving us the story instead about the actual subjects of that story!
Far from feeling sorry for the MSM, all many of us can raise is contempt.