From MySpace to murder
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10272868/
This disturbs me. For a number of reasons…
The first one that jumped off the page immediately is this headline that somehow implicated MySpace and a big image of an online profile that ISN’T a MySpace profile. And now that I think about it, a story in the most recent People Magazine (w/ Brit and baby on the cover) quotes this profile image exactly and stated it’s from her MySpace. Now, she could be lazy like me and just copy/paste all that stuff but still, if you are going to point out MySpace like that at least show the profile from there and NOT Xanga.
Another thing is that Kara and David didn’t meet online. Nobody has disputed this fact. Her family, her friends and police all agree they met through a Home Schooling support group. Whatever the hell that is. Sure they talked online and chatted online but when this first happened I took the time to look over David’s MySpace profile and I really didn’t see anything from Kara that would have been a cause for alarm other than an age difference. Little messages that were superficial and tweeny and harmless.
Can’t we just blame the MURDER and not a website? I can’t get over the media’s NEED to place blame wherever they can to sensationalize a story. Kara’s parents had forbid her from going online. But she still did. They told her that she could not date an 18 year old. But she still did. They told DAVID not to come around anymore and he shot them in the head. Shooting Kara’s mother in the back of the head as she sat there in a chair, covered in a blanket.
If David had killed Kara and not the parents, the media would be persecuting them for not doing enough. They’s say that Kara’s parents should have been keeping better tabs on her. Or that their extreme Christian beliefs drove her to rebel. But, they didn’t get that chance and they needed a story so they blame a website for driving the kid to murder. Because that’s much easier. That’s more sensational. That will create more of a panic and bring in more readers. That will mask the fact that there are people out there that are so fucked up in the head they’d shoot two people point blank for… what, puppy love?
These parents were doing the right thing. They cared about their daughter. They did all the thing the media tells parents they should do. Monitoring web use, keeping tabs on boyfriends, stepping in. And I feel like that sacrifice has been cheapened by the media’s attempt focus on and “blame” a website for this and not the man that shot them.
/rant
My take was somewhat different than yours. I didn’t sense any blame, rather it sounded to me like a review of how the media seized upon and, perhaps, tried to over analyze the information on the blog. This is a new opportunity for journalists since prior to the “blogosphere” many of the things that can be seen on blogs were not available, or were confined to personal journals or diaries, that by definition were unavailable to the world at large. With the blogs came the possibility for public consumption of the heretofore private thoughts of individuals. It provides even more opportunity for voyeristic, entertainment based “news”.
Summary: I didn’t see them placing any blame, just examining a new social phenominom.
My take is between you two. I think the article was poorly written as someone, like anna, that is very familiar (or obsessed? Myself anyway ;)) with weblogs and myspace. I read a shorter, similar article that made a more clear explination about the personal trail our generation leaves online and in this case, one that seems like the typical teens with mindless banter and no clues what was to come (besides her attempt to draw a tie with deer hunting — please!)
Ps sorry if this post seems scattered, I’m on the SK at the bank and slow typing leaves my thoughts far ahead of my thumbs! 🙂