Panel examines effects of sniper coverage

A selection of Boston media figures assessed the coverage of the "Beltway Sniper" yesterday, taking the opportunity to discuss the news media's portrayal of the serial killers who went on a murderous spree around Washington, DC last month.

Panelists at the event, which was sponsored jointly by the Communication and Media Studies Program and The Tufts Daily, focused on television news and criticized 24-hour cable news programs, especially Fox News, for creating the atmosphere of fear and sensationalism based on the capital-area events.

The sniper case exemplified problems with media coverage in general, according to Boston Globe Media Analyst Mark Jurkowitz. "There is a lot of caloric intake in television news, and not so many nutrients," Jurkowitz said. Yawning stretches of airtime when there is nothing newsworthy to cover causes news channels to fill gaps with fluff and speculation, he said.

The other panelists, Boston University Journalism Professor Nick Mills and WBUR News Director Sam Fleming, agreed with Jurkowitz that print news rarely comes close to the same intensity displayed in television. "They turn every event into drama with a musical scene," Jurkowitz said of cable news networks.

In contrast to television news, Fleming said that he thought NPR _ of which WBUR is an affiliate _ focused more on hard news like ballistics tests and did not cover the story as "extensively as the 24-hour news stations." Nonetheless, NPR reported on the case more extensively because it took place in Washington, DC and still "did a fairly good job."

As more and more commercial news stations use consultants to determine coverage, the mantra "if it bleeds, it leads" shapes television news to an increasing degree.

"It's the nature of television news," Mills said. Crime and disaster stories have the most interesting visuals, and the visual component often trumps content in television news coverage. Extensive coverage of "bleeding" news events has also lead to copycat crimes, the panelists said.

Panel members agreed that the birth of the television pundit led to the lack of substance in modern television news. According to Jurkowitz, news media use pundits _ so-called "experts" _ because they fill up airtime and often come for free. Most importantly, the majority of viewers will watch pundits, especially if they are discussing controversial issues like the "Beltway Sniper" or the OJ Simpson trial.

"They go live to the scene of a shooting and talk about nothing," Jurkowitz said. "It's the price we pay for having a free press."

Many television news viewers simply expect sensationalized stories when they tune in. "Essentially, the news is garbage," sophomore Evan Cochran said. "I just watch it for entertainment value, not for actual information."

Washington's terror-filled month ended Oct. 24 when John Allen Muhammad, 41, and John Lee Malvo, 17, were arrested for allegedly shooting at least ten people. After a recent battle between states for the right to try the suspects first, Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that Muhammad and Malvo will be charged with capital murder in two Virginia counties where they can receive the death penalty.

The panelists welcomed the chance to discuss the issues that media coverage of the sniper case had raised. "It's always interesting to look back and see how the media covered a story," Fleming said. "It's usually discussed while it's happening," and then everyone is forced to move on and leave it behind.