Originally posted by Gregory
Elizabeth Smart was still being interviewed on television six months after she was recovered. She was featured in People Magazine two years after. Our definitions of "quickly faded" must be drastically different.
one article in people magazine as opposed to the media fiasco which was plastered over every news outlet, taking priority over all world events? ok 😬
I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. I mentioned that people were still thinking about Smart two years after everything had been resolved--dispite your claim that the case had "quickly faded away"--and your reply is ...
one article in people magazine as opposed to the media fiasco which was plastered over every news outlet, taking priority over all world events? ok
I don't even know whether the "media fiasco" you're talking about is the one surrounding Smart or Ramsey. Please try to make more sense in the future.
Originally posted by Gregory
I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. I mentioned that people were still thinking about Smart two years after everything had been resolved--dispite your claim that the case had "quickly faded away"--and your reply is ...Please try to make more sense in the future.
im talking about extensive and obsessive media coverage. maybe we just have a misunderstanding here, of which i hope is the case. if not you are being deliberate and/or just picking a fight. or maybe you were in a coma the months following ramsey's murder, in which case im happy for your recovery and will be sending a belated 'get well' fruit basket.
I'm not trying to pick a fight. I shouldn't have said you were being stupid. But I honestly don't understand you. The Elizabeth Smart case was covered extensively until Mitchel was ruled unfit to stand trial. At that point, the media coverage trailed off, even though she wasn't forgotten (People, etc). Do you think that was a bad thing? If the media frenzy did trail off somewhat after she was recovered, do you really think it was because her abductor was white?
At first it was the typical "WHITE GIRL GOT KIDNAPPED!! F*CKING PANIC, Y'ALL!" The FBI, the CIA and even former President Clinton commented on it.
Than it turned out freaky with the whole religous, abduction crap...
But in the beginning it was nothing more than another kidnapping/missing girl. But since she was white and blond, of course we had to involve the entire country...
Originally posted by Gregory
I'm not trying to pick a fight. I shouldn't have said you were being stupid. But I honestly don't understand you. The Elizabeth Smart case was covered extensively until Mitchel was ruled unfit to stand trial. At that point, the media coverage trailed off, even though she wasn't forgotten (People, etc). Do you think that was a bad thing? If the media frenzy did trail off somewhat after she was recovered, do you really think it was because her abductor was white?
now:
there is a difference between keeping a topic in the spotlight, (or in the case of smart, returning it momentarily) and exploiting a single incident ad nauseum.
and i think the trail off of media coverage on smart at that point was due to the fact that there was nothing left to cover, or in the case of our media: exploit for sensationalism. of coarse the later recovery and readjusting of a victim of any kind makes a nice heart warming story as well as a cautious reminder, its an entirely different animal.
remember, we are talking about a media who publically tried and convicted bene's own parents and had the majority of america believing that they were murderers of the worst kind. the same media which plastered this girls face everywhere for what seemed like an eternity while at the same time countless other children met a similar fate with minimal coverage. once the parents were acquitted, there was no more hook, no more passion, and it became just another story about a child who was brutalised and murdered. important to you and i, but not in the face of the media. thus the story just vanished as we saw.
its all about sensationalism. there has to be a hook, and sad as i am to say it, the rape and murder of a child in and of itself is not enough to convince major media outlets to push the story to a fraction of the extent in which the bene story was pushed.
two elements convinced them to make this THE story of the year(how long was it going on for anyway? months to say the least), one being that the parents were suspects, and two being that this little girl was the epitome of the perfect white american child. sorry, but thats fact.
and to all of you who throw their hands up in disgust, rather than be outraged by someone who points it out, point your aggression toward the ones who feigned concern and sadness for this child by overpublicising the story, when in fact they are exploiting the hook for the sake of profit, while jeopardizing the lives of her family and putting them through unimaginable trauma...as if they didnt have enough already
And now they have a hook. Pretty little white girl murdered by a deranged man who druged her, raped her, intentionally or accidently killed her, and then fled to Bangkok. The sensational ending to a ten-year old case!
You said that story would fade because the killer was white. That's what I couldn't believe. Even if you think the news is the most racist institution in the world, do you really think they're just going to drop this thing because of the killer's skin color?
(I was about eleven when this happened, and managed to completely miss it the first time around. Can't say I'm sorry; the media seems to really have outdone itself in the sleaze department this time. If they do drop it quickly, I'll bet it's going to be because they don't want people to remember how they acted towards the parents, now that they've been definitively cleared)
Originally posted by Gregory
And now they have a hook. Pretty little white girl murdered by a deranged man who druged her, raped her, intentionally or accidently killed her, and then fled to Bangkok. The sensational ending to a ten-year old case!
no, its simple closure. as i said, this story will fade just as quickly as it reappeared. check next weeks paper. it wont be there. shit...check tomorrow's paper when its out.
Originally posted by Gregory
You said that story would fade because the killer was white. That's what I couldn't believe. Even if you think the news is the most racist institution in the world, do you really think they're just going to drop this thing because of the killer's skin color?
that was the only remaining hook. race. the only way the media could continue to exploit it. they play on our prejudice and profit. thats their business. they nearly had all of south central l.a. burn to the ground just to keep exploiting the hook.
and no, you didnt get the point about race. if the killer was anyone other than some white person or suited any other sensationalist trend, it would reemerge as THE STORY!!! *panic*
if it was anyone other than a white guy, it would play on prejudice. it would sell, they would profit. its simple really. we are talking about corporations with no concern for the public good who exploit fear for profit. its just a matter of connecting the dots.
Originally posted by Gregory
(I was about eleven when this happened, and managed to completely miss it the first time around. Can't say I'm sorry; the media seems to really have outdone itself in the sleaze department this time.)
you missed an ocean of oozing media slime, then. i envy you
Originally posted by PVS
glad someone pointed that out. it was just more sensationalist garbage. im glad that this guy was caught, however am appauled by the relative lack of concern for any other murdered child. but this story will fade as quickly as it resurfaced since the apparent killer is white.
PVS, I certainly understand the sentiment here. I was equally as frustrated by the ubiquitous Natalie Holloway story from last year, or should I say non-story. But I have to disagree about the degree or racial undertone you imply here. Part of the macabre interest in this story was the fact that the Benet girl was part of that whole dysfunctional 5 year old beauty pageant culture. On top of that, there was ample reason to suspect her obviously fu.ked up parents were complicit in the murder. It were these factors that primarily fueled the interest in the story, not the fact that she was some kind of "white medial darling." (That was the Natalie Holloway story.)
By the way, I know it wasn't you, PVS, but somebody earlier posted how pretty the Benet girl looked...Has anyone recently looked at her picture? She looks like a baby with caked on Barbie doll make-up. It's like something out of "Child's Play". Completely grotesque. Any parent that would scar their child like that should be reported to Child Protection immediately.
Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
Part of the macabre interest in this story was the fact that the Benet girl was part of that whole dysfunctional 5 year old beauty pageant culture.
correct, that was a hook to exploit. a very relevant one which i overlooked, and the direct cause of immediate hatred of the girl's own parents. whats that word? 'prejudice'
Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
On top of that, there was ample reason to suspect her obviously fu.ked up parents were complicit in the murder. It were these factors that primarily fueled the interest in the story, not the fact that she was some kind of "white medial darling." (That was the Natalie Holloway story.)
i disagree. the media doesnt settle for one hook if they dont have to. one hook only means one fish. take the rodney king fiasco for example. multiple hooks. white people outraged by the black "animals" tearing up l.a. while at the same time black americans outraged over the aquittal of those officers.
thats how good they are at what they do. they played the part of the k.k.k. and black panthers all on the same broadcast. then they would broadcast random interviews of idiotic knee-jerk reactionaries and people would be outraged by the exhibited outrage! first interview the dumb white racist who calls them "animals", then interview the crackhead who says that rodney king is a hero...etc. fear, anger, and prejudice build and next thing you know l.a. is burning. thats the power and skill they have to affect us. dont underestimate that.
with that said, the only possible hook remaining was race. (unless the guy turned out to be a priest or met the criteria of any other sensationalist story...if he was a catholic priest for example)
can you honestly say that this would fade just as quickly if this guy was black? arab? anything non-white? (assuming this story does fade out quickly which im sure it will). do you think that the media wouldnt hype up the potential goldmine of racism?
Originally posted by PVS
with that said, the only possible hook remaining was race. (unless the guy turned out to be a priest or met the criteria of any other sensationalist story...if he was a catholic priest for example)can you honestly say that this would fade just as quickly if this guy was black? arab? anything non-white? (assuming this story does fade out quickly which im sure it will). do you think that the media wouldnt hype up the potential goldmine of racism?
I don't remember this story fading that quickly, but it has been 10 years...
In general, I agree with your media condemnation. Black victim stories are often downplayed or ignored to focus on high-profile white crimes. But, then again, black crime usually dosen't aspire to those extra levels of white, suburban psychological dysfunction. When's the last time you heard about a black couple enrolling their 5 year old in a beauty contest? That's usually the provenance of white, schizoid suburbia. The point is, I really do think the main "hook" in this case was the suspicion of the parents in the killing and the whole public fascination/identification with the fetishistic presentation of a pre-pubescent girl as a sex object.