Media coverage of shootings sensationalizes, encourages violence

Though it’s only been 13 days since the start of the month, three on-campus shootings have already made national news during October 2015. Ten people died during an attack that took place at Umpqua Community College on Oct. 1, and two more people were killed on Oct. 9 in separate attacks at Northern Arizona University and Texas Southern University. This exceptional bloodshed reflects a dramatic increase in the rate of gun-related mass killings reported in past years, according to FBI reports. With school shootings making headlines so often, it is almost enough to make one wonder whether these shootings even newsworthy anymore.

Of course campus massacres are newsworthy -- and that just may be part of the problem. Recent studies show that media coverage may have a role in increasing rates of school shootings and mass killings, not just homicides and suicides.

The idea that media is complicit in spreading violence is nothing new. In 1974, American sociologist David Phillips coined the term “the Werther effect” to describe copycat phenomena. Phillips found that highly publicized stories of violent behavior led to increased incidences of similar behaviors. In this way, violence could be described as contagious.

Concern about the way media outlets portray perpetrators of armed violence resurfaced a couple of weeks ago when Douglas County, Ore. Sheriff John Hanlin, who spoke at a press conference following the Umpqua Community College attack, refused to name the shooter. Hanlin said he did not wish to glorify the gunman's actions and has continued to remain silent about the suspect’s identity, despite the fact that other sources have leaked the man’s name to reporters.

Hanlin is not the only one to object to typical coverage practices. The No Notoriety campaign, launched in the wake of the Oregon attack, calls on media outlets to limit the amount of information they release about shooters and elevate coverage of the victims. Instead, supporters of the movement claim that publishing gunmen’s photos and self-serving statements could lead others to commit similar crimes and that the suspect’s name is often irrelevant to coverage of investigations.

At present, there does not seem to be enough research data to either confirm or deny the claim that publishing a suspect’s name can impact copycat violence. The growing number of mass murders, nevertheless, seems reason enough for media outlets to reconsider their approach to reporting. To start, it might be useful to ask institutions that research mass violence for help. The World Health Organization and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention have already issued guidelines to journalists for reporting on suicide. Perhaps it’s time to develop similar recommendations for reporting on campus shootings.

As a college publication, the Daily is particularly concerned with the way its coverage impacts campus safety. Information is imperative to keeping a campus safe, but it must be stewarded responsibly to avoid replicating the violence it ought to help prevent.