In the article "'Vultures' or reporters? After shooting, witnesses hit with media requests." (Paul Farhi, October 1), people are talking about how others reacted after a college shooting. While the shooting was happening, some students were posting updates on the conditions inside through social media. Almost immediately students inside got responses from reporters and other news people asking if everyone was okay. However after the fact that they found out people were okay, they began asking questions. They were all trying to get details for news stories. After the shooting was over, people began tweeting negative things about what the reporters had done. One reporter says he knows its wrong because the people in those events are frightened. However he sometimes does it as well.
The author is trying to argue weather reporters should or should not be allowed to interact with people in situation or have to wait until after the situation is done. I personally believe there victim should have a choice on weather they want to interact with the news or not.
I believe the authors argument is valid because people should have a choice and the fact that sometimes they don't is unfair to other people. For me, it is unclear on which side of this argument the author is on.
The part i don't understand is if the journalists know what they are doing is wrong, why they continue to do it anyways. In conclusion, I believe that news reporters should take other peoples feelings into consideration. And if i had to guess i think the author feels that same way.
No comments:
Post a Comment