Shooting at Connecticut Elementary School

I was actually thinking about this earlier before i visited this thread. The media DOES draw too much attention to the killer. It provides a sort of sick minded appeal to being immortalized for their horrible actions.

Think about it; some disturbed individual who feels meaningless or just has nothing to lose seeing how this one person gained so much power; the suffering, the face plastered everywhere, the attention. So they see all this and realize 'Even if i die doing it, i'm going to be etched into minds forever for it.'

And that's why I want the coverage for these kinds of tragedies to focus on the victims. To be a reminder that we have to love and care for each other even in suffering. and to legally refer to the killer as 'Garbage', cause their name doesn't need to be known, nor their face, beyond any information that will be useful for protecting ourselves. They're insignificant and don't need to be acknowledged but as society's trash for betraying it.

I'm not saying EVERY criminal does it for that reason, but the media sure as hell don't need to provide ANY MORE INCENTIVE.

Which side of the story do you think is more appealing though to some shmuck tired from work and going through channels? These stations want to retain viewers for as long as possible and increase the number of viewers watching, mostly so they can justify placing higher premiums for advertising to prospective sponsors.