TED Conversations

Robert Winner


This conversation is closed.

Media breaking news reports.

The United States has just had a school shooting incident at a elementary school. As in the case of the Colorado shooting the media made initial assessments, some right and some wrong, that went on for hours and interviews with students and those in the know. Links to the Tea Party, and all sorts of claims went on the air with absolutely no proof or even foundation.

There is one station in our area that says ... we have a report that XXX has occured and we will get back to you when we have a full and accurate report.

So the question is: Should the media wait for facts, stop making the news, and return to reporting the event. A interview with anyone who is involved is more emotional than factual and will be used by lawyers later. Should these people be protected from the media until debriefing has occured and a full picture is available and evidence obtained.

How do you view this?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Dec 16 2012: In the case of the breaking news the mdia should report what is happening at that moment that it happens because this is something that needs to be known right away being that someone watching the news could be affected with that particular situation at the time. I think interviews should be conducted even if it is emotional depending because sometimes emotions bring out the truth. This evidence should be used at the time in court because sometimes when an interviewed is done weeks later people tend to forget or leave out actual facts that could help in solving the case.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.