/Special/ Victims.

[Plaidman]

I hate special victims. Or media victims is a better word mayhaps.

What I mean by that, is people like Elizabeth Smart, or currently in portland, Kyron Horman. Children that are kidnapped or turn up missing, and suddenly get thousands of people searching for them, special funding to make tasks forces and detectives who's sole job is to find them.

Meanwhile, another missing or kidnap child is given a ten second blurb on the news with a minor description (usually sans photo) and quickly forgotten.

What makes one different then the other? (Other then money or in some cases, race). It's sickening. No parent should suffer the lost of a child, and it's a major slap in the face to witness major manhunts for one child, with much funding going into finding that one child, while if your kid went missing? Well you might get a cop to look around the neighborhood once for five minutes.

It's the same with other murder victims, like the recent shooting with a governer or whatever, and the kid. Major media, the nation mourns etc, because hey, it's so horrible that some people died.

Yes, it is horrible. But no more horrible then any other of the thousands of people that are murdered the exact same way every week in this country, not to mention the tens of thousands that happen all over the world. But no, it's far better to make some people more special and screw the rest that are murdered or killed.

Children go missing, but only a few deserve massive man hunts and funding.
People are murdered, but only a few deserve country mention.

It just pisses me off.

[Greenday]

As far as the manhunts thing, that's usually only in the case of a kidnapping.

As for murders, well, if they did a long-ass story for every murder, there'd be nothing else on the news and still not enough time to cover them all.

[Mytical]

I can't agree more Plaidman. It's not always a celebrity or rich person's kid (though it often is), but it doesn't matter as I see no reason they are 'special'. It seems to have no rhyme or reason, and people just sit there and nod sagely. Now don't get me wrong, I think in a kidnapping or missing child case everything possible should be done, but no more for one person then another. No clue why certain people get special treatment.

[Ipecac Drano]

The problem isn't the media. Maybe we should focus on the cause of the kidnappings, murders, etc.?

[Lace Neil Singer]

Yeah, I know what you mean. Over here, the one that springs instantly to mind is Madeleine McCann. Never mind the fact that her parents contributed to her disappearance by leaving her alone with her two little siblings in an unlocked hotel room, the whole world needs to rise to the occasion and beat their collective fists in order to find her.

Whereas several other cases of missing children have received little or no publicity and funding. When people were going around begging for donations to help find Madeleine, I refused to contribute on the grounds that the OP listed. Instead, I donated to a charity that pledged to help find ALL missing people.

[Greenday]

The problem isn't the media. Maybe we should focus on the cause of the kidnappings, murders, etc.?

Which is...what?

[HYHYBT]

I'll agree, but only in theory. It's simply not possible to pay anywhere near that much attention to every murder, kidnapping, etc; so the only option for treating them equally is for *none* of them to get enough notice to be memorable. And that doesn't seem right either. So the ones that have some aspect that catches people's attention get followed.

Since LNS mentioned charity... well, it's a bit like that. (Only a bit; please don't try to expand this beyond what it will support) You can't give to every worthy cause that comes along. If you did divide up what you have to give among them all, none of them would get enough to notice, or even enough to cover the paperwork for accepting it. Do you, then, give nothing to any of them, or do you pick one or a handful that particularly appeal to you for one reason or another (any reason, including happening to come to your attention at a convenient moment) and concentrate on those?

I'm talking about news coverage here, not police investigation; that does need to be done for all, to the extent that available evidence in each case allows. (As in the famous case of the stolen toilets, sometimes there's just nothing to go on.)

[AdminAssistant]

Personally, I don't think national or international news should focus on local events. I really, honestly do not give a damn if a Boy Scout in Montana got separated from his troop and made best buddies with a wolf pup. Besides, the children that get all the attention? 99.99% of the time they are white and cute. Preferably with wealthy parents. And that *is* sickening.

[Ginger Tea]

When Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman (least I think that was their names) AKA the soham kids first went missing, my mum knew about it first, thing is she saw it on the national news oop norf and I, staying in Cambridge for a festival weekend (this was before I moved back down), didn't hear about it till I read the local news paper the following day.

Granted I did not have access to a TV and wouldn't watch the local news anyway as I was just visiting, but if it makes it nationally the same day and is front page on the local and national dailies the next day, I have to wonder, is it
A> worth letting the whole of the UK know two girls have dissapared in a village somewhere between Ely and Cambridge ASAP
B> keep it local then widen the search as needs arise.

In the end their killers was local to the village and they were not being driven to Wales as one family was stopped as they had two girls of their age and both looked distressed in a car, turns out they were just acting up after a long trip as kids probably do.
Going nationally just had everyone looking in all the wrong places and at any child refusing to cooperate with its parents as a potential abduction in progress, yet not going nationally ASAP could have meant that the family going to Wales WAS in fact the abductor and the two girls.

Had two local boys gone missing, probably page 7 local news only.

[guywithashovel]

I've noticed this, too.

I think a lot of times, the people at the big news networks (CNN, Fox, etc.) just pick up on a local story somewhere and sensationalize it for the money, ratings, and so on. Either that, or they just get bored talking about the warfare going on in the Middle East and Africa and want something that the talking heads can make comments about to garner people's support.

And Admin is right. It's usually a kid from a family that is white and well-to-do, and they'll usually show a few shots of their lavish home and lifestyles while doing the newsreels.

[Rageaholic]

That's how I feel about the Arizona masacre. Yes, it sucks that some nutcase shot a bunch of people, and I understand that this being a congresswoman, it's a special event, but she survived for Christ sake (which is a good thing). This whole thing is sensationalized to the point of insanity. Every front page is about her recovery. And the fucking President interrupted one of my favorite shows just to give some speech on her. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. I'm not saying the news shouldn't discuss this, but they are making a mountain out of a molehill and ignoring other issues.

[Hyena Dandy]

Well, I think part of the reason people are so upset about Congresswoman Gifford is they're afraid that this means there's going to be some more, worse civil unrest.

Although any shooting where nine people die is worth noting to me.

I'd rather see a few people given major attention and others none than see nobody given attention.

And the speech Obama gave, for the most part, was one I think needed to be said, and this was a catalyst that would make people listen. We need to stop the hatred. We need to work together. We're all in this country together, so let's get to work. I understand that its frustrating to have your show interrupted, but that was something that needed to be said, and good shows are usually in primetime. That's when people are most likely to be able to watch.

It does bother me that its almost always upper-middle-class to rich white girls who get a big deal maybe out of them. They deserve coverage, but I wish more poeple got covered. And not just rich white girls.

Maybe make a lottery...

[Racket_Man]

I've noticed this, too.


And Admin is right. It's usually a kid from a family that is white and well-to-do, and they'll usually show a few shots of their lavish home and lifestyles while doing the newsreels.

to be a little more specific the child tends to be white,from an affuent family, cute, AND female

[blas87]

There are plenty of children of other races (mostly black, actually) on Nancy Grace every week.

I love the woman to death and she is one of my idols, but damn can she over sensationalize every single case on her show. It's beyond disgusting that these things happen, but to act like it's never happened before or that no one walking these streets or babysitting your kids is a potential murderer or kidnapper...........let's get real here.

[Rageaholic]

What I also hate is if you dare say anything about the overcoverege of one of these things, you're bound to get labled as a unsympathetic monster. During the Heath Ledger death saga, I once commented on how while I think his death was sad, I really couldn't give too shits since I didn't even know the guy. Keep in mind, I didn't insult or belittle him because my comment was more toward the news overcoverege of him. I just couldn't bring myself to care. Yet, I still had these holier than thou posters jumping on my case and calling me a jerk.