I assume everyone over the last year and a half has heard something on the news about the missing, now murdered child, Caylee Anthony. I am curious about one thing that I noticed during the investigation in regards to the press coverage it received. Every morning for months, there would be a new development, and the press would hold a convention right on street, threatening to swell into the lawn. Leaving the house would mean accepting manslaughter charges as their SUV backed over reporters. There would be no escape because the press had vans waiting to follow. What are the limitations of the press in highly publicized cases involving private citizens such as the Anthony’s?
The press’ use of its “freedom” becomes nearly oppressive to the average Joe. Unlike a corporation, which enjoys the comfort of staffed PR, lawyers, individual rights, and intangibility, the typical citizen is easily overwhelmed by the onslaught of photographers and investigative journalists. I wonder if the frenzy becomes all the more intense because of the easy pickings. That our media will stalk and swarm such a small group of people in such large numbers for a chance at a headline is exactly why we oftentimes view journalists with disdain. Group intimidation is in no way ethical, especially during a police investigation.
I am mostly ranting, but shouldn't there be a line? Is there a line? The freedom of the press should not include the right to bully our neighbors with the same force they would need to annoy a corporation.
No comments:
Post a Comment