On Monday, President Obama was scheduled to address the media regarding an ongoing economic recovery. But before he could, he had to begin with the solemn words, "So we are confronting yet another mass shooting."
As our hopes for common-sense gun control legislation seem slim at this point - with a Congress that is more dysfunctional than ever - we believe a test of critical importance lies upon the media's handling of this recent incident of morbid familiarity.
A month ago, the gunman in the recent incident called the Rhode Island police. He notified them that he was forced to change hotels three times to avoid people who were keeping him awake. The people, he said, had been pursuing him and making noises through the walls, floors and ceilings of each hotel.
He told the officers he had gotten into an argument with someone at an airport in Virginia who sent "three people to follow him," and that they had been harassing him with a microwave machine.
What comes next should be no surprise: He had a history of being treated for psychiatric issues. He had a pattern of behavioral problems, which included getting arrested, receiving a less-than-honorable discharge from the military and being involuntarily committed to a residential treatment center for his mental health.
Despite a troubled history - which included treatment by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, no less - he had no problem entering the Washington Navy Yard, a military base, on Sept. 16, where he would go on to kill 12 people.
We do not understand how it was possible that he could legally obtain a firearm and enter a military facility. This episode, so redolent of past incidents, is yet another obvious signal that there should be stricter background checks and more measures taken to ensure that guns do not get in the hands of people with mental illness.
A matter of more topical relevance, however, is the way the media publicizes the perpetrators after these events, and consequently, glorifies them in a bizarre and sickening way.
Because there is virtually no prospect of a law being passed soon, it is, sadly, a more practical hope that the press could recognize a need to modify the presentation of their reporting.
The coverage of these events when they happen is disgraceful in a number of ways: the obsession with the criminal's personal history, the insistence on interviewing those closest to him or her and the exploitation of the massacre as a commercial opportunity.
The media outlets - CNN, MSNBC, Fox News - know how, in a weird way, this is what sparks the public's interest: what Joseph Conrad called, "the fascination with the abomination."
Perhaps no publication exemplified this more than Rolling Stone. It was totally inappropriate for the magazine to put a photograph of Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its cover in July as if he was a rock star - the quality of the reporting notwithstanding.
What the press needs to start doing is stop giving the culprits of mass shootings and acts of terrorism such an elevated spot on television, the Internet and print media.
Every time this happens, it seems we fall into the same cycle: People get outraged and upset, a discussion ensues of what actions to take and that is all that ends up ensuing - a discussion.
What we need is more than a discussion. But the discussion we want to start having has to do with what changes the media needs to make.
It does the public no good to have those considering carrying out some heinous act to see how much attention they could get. Not to mention the shame and humiliation for the families of the perpetrators who have to deal with the inundation of such media coverage.
As the next generation of journalists, we, at The Spectrum, vow to not publish or publicize the names of those who commit acts of mass violence. If, God forbid, something like this were to happen at UB, we would not give any villain's name the space of our newspaper. For they do not deserve a space in our lives.
We're hoping other news outlets will do the same.
Email: editorial@ubspectrum.com
