At last count, the video depicting the tragic fatal shooting of a young news reporter in Virginia had garnered over 10 million views on social media. Despite warnings of its extremely graphic content- or perhaps because of that warning- as soon as the video was posted it went viral. Why is it that so many people were drawn to something so disturbing? And do we really understand the long-term psychological and emotional consequences of intentionally exposing oneself to something so traumatic and horrifying? The phenomenon of “rubber necking” or feeling compelled to slow down long enough to look at the remnants of a car accident on the side of the road is nothing new. However, watching a murder that has been captured in real time and graphic detail, and having the ability to watch it repeatedly, is a byproduct of this generation’s fascination with cell phone videos, body cameras, Youtube, and other forms of social media. In my mind, the fact that the exploitation and glamorization of heinous behavior is acceptable, quickly made public, and not challenged in any way is a part of the tragedy.
Is it possible that the proliferation of reality shows paired with incredibly violent video games, movies, and the “if it bleeds it leads” mentality of local and cable TV news channels has not only made the public immune to violent imagery but actually normalized and encouraged us to seek it out? Of course everyone is outraged by this senseless and sick act but is anyone outraged by the fact that so many people are revisiting it on Youtube? Doesn't the viewing of this murder undermine her grieving family’s right to privacy and cheapen the memory of the victim’s life?
I understand the notion of using social media to highlight what a wonderful and caring woman she was as well as the meaningful contributions she made. But would anyone actually want social media to be used to highlight their murder? And what about the murderer? When social media and the news are willing to repeatedly show his picture and the footage of his despicable act doesn’t that make him an instant celebrity and bestow a kind of “fame” upon him that he has no business having? As a former newscaster, he obviously understood the power of disseminating something so awful on the Internet and may have seen social media as the quickest vehicle for his 15 minutes of fame.
Despite the fact that many people are inured to violent imagery, taking it in and forcing the brain to make sense out of it is another story. Children and teenagers don't have fully myelinated brains and can’t process traumatic experiences the way adults can. Viewing this kind of graphic and senseless imagery can evoke nightmares, sleep disturbance, anxiety, fear, phobias, and depression. It creates an over-generalized sense that the world is inherently unsafe and danger lurks around every corner.
Adults who have prior histories of trauma or who have been victims of violent crimes in the past can be terribly triggered and re-traumatized when exposed to these kinds of news stories and the accompanying video footage.
As challenging or counter-intuitive as it might seem, we need to push back in protest, refusing to watch this kind of footage, protecting our children from viewing it, and refusing to support news stations and social media that attempt to exploit someone else’s tragedy while granting the perpetrator celebrity status. In the case of this innocent woman who was simply doing her job and was gunned down in cold blood, social media has gone too far. Stop showing pictures of the killer, let her family grieve in peace, and let her memory be kept alive and preserved through positive images instead.
