Apr. 25, 2007

When tragedy sears our nation's soul, the initial pained outcry often centers on "why?" America continues its struggle to make sense of last week's shootings at Virginia Tech.

Last Monday, MSN introduced to the homepage a wider template designed for major breaking news. This layout helped to convey the magnitude of the massacre and represented an unprecedented effort by editors, designers, the ad team and Web engineers to accomplish it quickly.

On Wednesday, as officials and reporters worked to find out more about the killer, NBC News editors studied an unimaginable package of material received Tuesday night from the assassin himself.

The multimedia diatribe of Seung-Hui Cho and his so-called manifesto provided a glimpse into the mind of a murderer – and subsequently media organizations faced decisions about what to do with it.

At NBC, the parent news organization of MSN's online news partner, MSNBC.com, the debate consumed much of the day. In a Thursday broadcast, NBC's Pete Williams quoted NBC News President Steve Capus' explanation of the decision: "People asked all week long what was inside the mind of this killer and what was he thinking, what led him to do this. When that material landed on our doorstep here, I thought we had an obligation."

At MSN, the thinking was similar, given MSNBC's role as our main news partner.

“The material that arrived at NBC was considered newsworthy by most media outlets and Web sites, including MSN. We felt that we had an obligation to present this new and huge development to our readers,” said Don Sena, MSN managing editor. “There has been considerable debate about the timing of the coverage and how long some media outlets stayed on this angle of the shooting. In hindsight, I feel we could have come off the package’s contents a bit sooner on Thursday morning.”

Despite forethought on appropriateness and newsworthiness, the decision struck many users as discomforting, if not downright wrong. The perspective detailed by Melissa of Corpus Christi, Texas, was shared by dozens of others:

"Just because you have pictures of the man who viciously shot and killed over 30 people at Virginia Tech doesn't mean I have to be subjected to them when I go to my MSN homepage. If I want to look at pictures of the psychopath, I would seek them out.  I don't need them displayed in front of me, initially unavoidable.  Out of respect for the victims and their families please pick something more tasteful and appropriate for the first thing people see when logging onto MSN.com.

"This latest picture of the killer holding weapons in both hands while saying that he sent correspondence to a national news source turned my stomach! Why give this slaughterer more attention?  I refuse to give attention to this murderer, and I should be given that choice."

We received feedback from Linda Childers Bowlby, of Littleton, Colo., who wrote, "I am having a difficult time viewing the graphic clips you have on the homepage of Cho. I understand you have a story to tell.  Would/could you use another picture of him that is not so graphic for the homepage? I'm a Columbine parent. It hurts my heart to be revisiting all of this again, especially upon the dawn of our anniversary. Thank you."

Editors often second guess themselves — and not just because of outcry in letters to the editor, an active bulletin board string like one started on MSNBC.com or comments posted to Brian Williams' Daily Nightly blog. In evaluating such highly emotional issues involving news judgment, agreement is rarely unanimous, regardless of a journalist's experience.

In hindsight, regarding the express use of the handgun photo on the homepage, I think MSN could have selected another image from the packet sent to NBC, though it was right to stay away from the one used by other news organizations of Cho holding a gun to his head. Additionally, I agree with Sena that MSN should have moved to a different photo or story angle earlier Thursday.

MSN is not the only media organization criticized by its handling of the images sent to NBC. The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz, perhaps the nation's preeminent newspaper media critic, addressed the fallout in a Friday blog posting. "In all the years I've been chronicling the media, I have rarely seen the tidal wave of resentment that has washed over television organizations that showed the now-infamous Cho video. In the minds of many Americans, this was a horribly offensive act, and no amount of explanation about the obligations of journalism is going to change that view."

Slate's Jack Shafer wrote that NBC needn't be apologetic for using the material, saying, "If you're interested in knowing why Cho did what he did, you want to see the videos and photos and read from the transcripts. If you're not interested, you should feel free to avert your eyes."

Across the Web, millions of users chose for themselves to view the video of the manifesto. The Associated Press' version, distributed to allied newspaper Web sites, became its most viewed online video ever, easily exceeding the raw video of Saddam Hussein's execution, an AP official reported Monday.

From Inside MSN feedback, MSN users were most upset at having no choice to avoid the homepage image of Cho brandishing his handguns. This lack of choice disturbed many people – and for me is at the core of how various mediums perhaps all too often over-cover a major news event.

In trying to make sense of an event of such magnitude, the tendency is to focus on it, almost to the exclusion of other deserving stories. Wanting to get their own imprimatur on a story, media organizations work to localize, analyze or explore. It gets over-reported. Last week so much energy was spent on the Virginia Tech shootings much of the nation already was at its saturation point hit when the manifesto arrived at NBC.

By Thursday morning, objections from the public — on top of continuing discussions in newsrooms — led many news organizations to cut back on showing the Cho videos, much like TV producers did on the horrifying footage of 9/11.

Debriefing and discussion continues this week in media circles, seeking to learn from this experience. The president of the Society of Professional Journalists is addressing various issues in her blog. The Online News Association (of which I serve as a board member) has distributed a survey, exploring how news organizations handled the story, from linking to field reporting to user input. At MSN, the editors continue to do the same.