Should John Mark Karr be so popular?

Call it "infamous," "popular" or whatever you want, but it amounts to the same thing. This sicko, if guilty of anything he's accused, deserves to be punished, and the courts will do that. In the mean time, he gets far more than 15 minutes of fame. An obsessive media will hammer every detail and speculate on every possibility imaginable, all the while toying with the foundations of the Bill of Rights: an impartial jury. CourtTV will have daily voting on guilt or innocence and the voters can never know the all the facts the jury will know.

Worse, and most dangerous, does all this publicity lead to more crime? Is it possible an attention seeker like Karr might actually kill for the publicity? Is it possible some lives are so wretched and meaningless that the only claim to fame is to kill in a sick attempt to have a place in history? Could it be that for some, "infamous" is better than nothing? We know some serial killers try to outdo the number of kills and become "the best," the most popular, number one.

The media claim a 1st Amendment right because the people have the right to know. 1) That right was mostly enacted as a check on the government, which the Founders knew better than to trust. 2) If there is one slim chance in hell, and hell it would be, that so much media attention might encourage these sickos to kill, we need to curb it, NOW.

The media could still track the case, and report on it after the verdict. And there would have to be some clause permitting them to report any abuse of judicial discretion before the verdict, but it would have to be abuse that overly favors the defense or prosecution severe enough to prevent a fair trial or sentence.

The public fed "if it bleeds, it leads" "news" is unhealthy anyway, in that viewers must be 100% passive. Viewers have no control over the verdict, while they do have SOME control over the discontent in Iraq and other matters of politics where public opinion can make a difference.

"If it bleeds, it leads," should be delegated to hospitals where someone can do something about it.

crave.

Could be. Hadn't thought of that.

If I even see the name Jon-Benet, I turn the page or change the channel.

It seems that our MSM is positively obsessed over this guy, however. Pity. Too bad they can't use these awesome resources to uncover the culprits behind 9/11.

Even as far as sensationalism and tripe, the Karr thing is a distance second to the much more interesting and sensational story unfolding from Austria.

You Yanks used to be good at this stuff...what's going on




At least when Media in Europe is accused of ignoring 'big stories', they have a compelling comeback to the critics. The Karr thing is virtual 'tin foil' fodder!

...poor little thing.

That her diary might sell as a book or for movie rights, and I hope she gets at least 1 mil for it, and that doctors don't take it all away.

Does that make me a hypocrite? Could be. It's different, somehow, though, maybe because it wouldn't be pundits telling us what to think second hand. If a movie or book, and the emotional integrity is kept in tact, it should be very powerful. A million bucks might not make up for the suffering, but it should help.

...all over again.