Media Reporting on Crime

[Aaron]

A simple poll to start discussion; Do you feel that media should be allowed to report on crimes prior to the case being seen in court?

What are people's thoughts on this issue?

[DBoons Ghost]

This is going to bring interesting discussion for sure.

I think it depends. I mean, reporting on the initial crime is one thing, but to call people out on national TV with no authorization from police is libel if live reporting is the mechanism and slander for written and should be treated as such in every case.

Case in point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centennial_Olympic_Park_bombing

Poor Richard Jewell.

Either way, if a reporter breaks a story and it proves to be false, the reporter says "oops" and gets to walk away, but the person or persons implicated's lives will be forever ruined.

I dunno if there is a straight yes or no answer to that question though.

[gregulus]

This is going to bring interesting discussion for sure.

I think it depends. I mean, reporting on the initial crime is one thing, but to call people out on national TV with no authorization from police is libel if live reporting is the mechanism and slander for written and should be treated as such in every case.

Case in point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centennial_Olympic_Park_bombing

Poor Richard Jewell.

Either way, if a reporter breaks a story and it proves to be false, the reporter says "oops" and gets to walk away, but the person or persons implicated's lives will be forever ruined.

I dunno if there is a straight yes or no answer to that question though.
I'm inclined to agree. Regardless of whether or not, being the target of speculation for a serious crime is certainly not going to prove beneficial to the future endeavors of any person.

[Mr. Ron]

yes, but its really annoying

[Gattsu347]

report bare bones facts about the ARREST, yes. Follow the person around, take pictures of them in their pajamas, speculate on national TV on the issue, no.

[Mr. Ron]

BREAKING NEWS WE JUST SAW BLOGO GETTING HIS MAIL MOAR AT SEVEN


same goes for any of these ****ing missing child stories. THEY GO ON FOREVER.

[Aaron]

I don't think they should be allowed to name people. Victims or suspects.

[Pastorius]

Unless you can isolate the jury for the duration of the trial, no. And seeing as it happens before juries are even decided, I say no. Taints the minds of the jury.

[VomitStainedCretin]

same goes for any of these ****ing missing child stories. THEY GO ON FOREVER.Really easy headline stories for tabloids; all they have to do is 'find'/forge some evidence suggesting so-&-so is involved or that this-or-that's happened to the kid and if they do it right they can have a completely different, contradictory headline every day and don't have to look for any 'real' stories for six months.

[Avalanche.]

BREAKING NEWS WE JUST SAW BLOGO GETTING HIS MAIL MOAR AT SEVEN


same goes for any of these ****ing missing child stories. THEY GO ON FOREVER.

Straight Nancy Grace Bullshit.

[Aaron]

^ Thanks for that coherent post.

[BigBadBooDooDady]

BREAKING NEWS WE JUST SAW BLOGO GETTING HIS MAIL MOAR AT SEVEN


same goes for any of these ****ing missing child stories. THEY GO ON FOREVER.

You haven't heard the latest with the Natalie Holloway case?

Well... neither have I :smash:

[Avalanche.]

^ Thanks for that coherent post.

Nancy Grace has been following the Caylee Anthony story for months.

[Pop music sucks]

Goddamn ****ing large bundle of sticks squirrel Nancy Grace and her pooptyass sensationalist reporting bullpoop

:angry:

I believe they should report the initial incident with impartiality while keeping the name of the aggressor/victim anonymous. Once the trial is completed, then report the outcome of said trial. The reporter should not drag their own personal convictions into the story.