There is that pull between a free press which is a competitive business and the need not to glamorize crime.
The story will be published, likely in all its horrific detail. But there will be lip service paid to the concept of journalistic restraint. After all, no one wants to return to the era of "yellow journalism."
So, the story of alleged murderer Robert Aaron Long is and will be big news.
It's crude but reality to position and package this as: A star has been born. Anyone who had watched enough episodes of "Criminal Minds" has a hunch that Long might be enjoying the attention he is getting. Indulging in psychobabble it could be conjected that gaining celebrity could have been an unconscious or conscious motive.
No way would the media outlets be persuaded for the overall public good to not cover sensationalistic crimes of this type. In that coverage, the alleged miscreant would play a central role. Yes, the public has a right to know. And, business demands it.
However, it's not unthinkable that in these violent times a new code of ethics could be negotiated between the media and law enforcement to limit coverage. A different type of sandbox could be created to play in. Perhaps through a lottery one media center would be assigned the entire story. Then the suspect's face would not, to use the cliche, be all over the news.
Sure, experts in criminology and experts in mental illness could develop case studies. But the code of ethics would deter using the devices of what is called as "narrative nonfiction." The mission of science would be served. The objective could not be to create a best-seller.
Those who perceive themselves as having nothing to lose could connect the dots and decide they have an identity and fame to gain. All they gotta do is go out there and unleash carnage.
Yes, place your paid sponsored content on this blog. Affordable rates. Please contact Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.