Quote:
Originally posted by Marc Ciampa+Mar 21 2005, 05:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Marc Ciampa @ Mar 21 2005, 05:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Mar 21 2005, 07:36 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-FlamesAddiction
|
Quote:
@Mar 21 2005, 06:22 PM
When a similar thing happened in Columbine, every network immediately started breaking the news, and the president addressed the nation.# This time it's pretty quiet.# I wonder if it's a sign that people are becoming more desensitized?
|
That's the first thing I thought as well. The story didn't even lead on the evening news. When Columbine happened it it not only led the newscasts, it took over the networks for several hours. It was on CNN all night.
|
The difference? I'm saddened to say, Indian Reservation vs. Upper-class suburban neighbourhood. [/b][/quote]
That
may be part of it, but to say it is
the difference is overstating it IMO.
Columbine was the first of its kind IIRC, which is always going to have the biggest impact. Today's tragedy wasn't even the first after Columbine, and I don't recall the others getting any more press.
Also, so much of Columbine played out live, for an extended period on TV. The shooters were roaming through the school for a while, and there was great uncertainty over how many shooters there were and where they were, giving camera crews time to get to the school and catch those dramatic live images of the students being evacuated by police, the student escaping out the window, etc., etc.
From what I can gather, the shooter today walked down a hall shooting, into one classroom where the students were killed and then shot himself. This was over before anyone in the media got wind of it, and it's the video footage that turns an incident like todays into a national one.
Columbine isn't Columbine without the video.