I find this to be a perfect message to the media at the disrespect they bring to the dead, and glorifying a killer by mentioning him/her in the news. this not only disgusts me, it's immoral and wrong. I don't care if it's their job, they don't care if it's something small, but to only care when people get killed is another thing entirely. how many people die each year and the person responsible for it gets attention? i want to know what your thought of it is as well, to me media are a bunch of greedy vultures who get paid off of other's suffering.
I lived in Roseburg. I was there for the RHS shooting in 2006, and I knew the UCC shooter from school. He was a creepy little POS back then, too. What John Hanlin did by refusing to identify the shooter worked. My mother still lives in Roseburg, and she told me recently that while most remember the UCC victims, almost nobody in town remembers the shooter's name, and fewer still are willing to discuss him.
It's no surprise media is going to do this. But the real question is who cares enough to stop it? And I'm not saying no one cares, I'm just saying that it's become a status quo like a lot of things. Media has brainwashed to many citizens for it to really matter what's brought up. We'll take anything the higher ups feed us and that's the sad truth. This is partly why people that do speak out against this stuff are considered conspiracy theorists. Though I don't dought there are few nutjobs out there that do spew nonsense conspiracies... not everyone is. It sounds like no one either cares enough, or is happily willing to hide the fact. Though there is a fine line with keeping it hidden on media and out right hiding it form those affected. Allow those affected to know the name, but the rest of the world left in the dark, unless deemed otherwise necessary. IDK, maybe my thoughts maybe not catching on the point.
Oh, they care. Roseburg's a fairly small city, so just about everyone there knew at least one of the people who died, or knows someone who was affected by the shooting. They still discuss the shooting, but they refuse to refer to the shooter by name, because they don't want him to be remembered. They're actively denying him the fame and recognition that he sought. Instead, they choose to remember the victims. The shooter, to the people of Roseburg, was a nameless monster who will eventually be forgotten, but his victims never will.
Okay, I see. I guess I was right in assuming I was not catching the point. I'm still half asleep at the moment, so I maybe not in the best mental condition right now to be reasoning logic. God, I need my coffee.
^ Again I reiterate my point. Look, no matter how much we argue this, not enough people are willing to take attention away from killers. There maybe a few that will, like with Ridley's video, but not many. Too many of the masses are brainwashed or too scared to call out BS on the news. News crews are more than happy to detail events of a bombing or a mass murder. They are more than happy to bring attention to the killers. If enough of America gave a *squee!*, something would of been done about a long time ago, but nope. Though bringing attention to it now may help open people's eyes. Only those willing to listen will see, but the blissfully ignorant will walk on thinking they don't have to follow any instruction other than what is told to them by the government or authorities. This is why Disturbed has my respect for this and many other reasons. So few bands are good in this day and age, let alone have songs with meaning to them.
