Buzz
The Columbine tragedy that unfolded 19 years ago was earth-shattering. The idea of teenagers carrying out a mass killing inside a high school was unheard of; it was almost beyond belief. The media coverage was exhaustive, filling the airwaves with every detail for months.
Today, however, mass shootings like Columbine have become shockingly frequent. In fact, it’s not even an exaggeration to say that they’re nearly a daily occurrence. Between the Columbine shooting and the Parkland massacre on February 14, 2018, the United States saw 1,624 mass shootings—an average of nearly one per day.
Something has shifted. This is no longer the world it was 19 years ago. There’s no single factor responsible for the increase in mass shootings; instead, it’s a complex mix of influences. But one key issue is the way we talk about it. Because, clearly, all the extensive media coverage of Columbine didn’t improve anything. It made the situation exponentially worse.
10. Mass Shootings Spread Like a Contagion
Mass shootings resemble a contagious disease—they spread rapidly. Every time a massacre grabs the spotlight, the likelihood of another one occurring within the next two weeks increases. The more attention a mass shooting gets, the greater the chance someone will try to imitate it.
The media doesn’t intentionally promote mass killings. The idea is that reporting these tragedies raises awareness and better equips people to prevent future attacks. That idea holds some truth—after each massacre, police receive more tips that help prevent the next would-be killer. People become more vigilant.
However, the copycat effect is even more significant. Despite all the additional safety measures, the influence of mass media coverage is so powerful that it’s estimated that 20 to 30 percent of all mass killings are committed by individuals imitating what they saw on TV. With the rise in mass killings since Columbine, it’s clear this effect only grows stronger over time.
9. Reporting Additional Details Increases the Likelihood of a Copycat Killer
The way we present news might play a role in this. A psychological principle suggests that the level of detail provided about these tragedies is what truly fuels copycat killings. The more clearly people can picture the crime, the more likely they are to attempt it themselves.
It's one of the key elements that influences every decision we make, from a simple trip to the grocery store to the most horrific acts. When individuals can visualize the entire sequence of their actions in their minds, with all the details, they are far more likely to follow through. This effect is particularly strong among adolescents and young adults, who are often the ones responsible for these imitation murders.
Copycat killings are much rarer when the media withholds certain details. The chain reaction diminishes when the news doesn't reveal the method used by the killer. It also lessens when we avoid disclosing the killer's identity or plastering their face on the front pages. Moreover, the effect reduces when we refrain from labeling the murder as an “inexplicable act by an otherwise normal person,” a phrase that makes the killer seem more understandable to potential imitators.
8. Killers Become Icons
By putting the faces of murderers on every newspaper cover, we begin to elevate them to a celebrity status. This has a profound effect.
Most of us will likely always see a school shooter as nothing more than a monster. However, for those isolated and marginalized individuals who might follow through with a massacre, these killers can become role models. It may be difficult to understand, but for some, these mass murderers are viewed as heroes.
Take James Holmes, the man behind the Aurora theater shooting. After claiming 12 innocent lives, Holmes began receiving fan mail. Women sent him letters while he was in prison, praising his “handsome” and “mysterious” nature, with some even sending love notes and pictures to decorate his cell.
However, no one has more followers than the Columbine killers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. At least 17 other mass shooters have explicitly named them as their inspiration, including some responsible for the most devastating massacres. This includes Seung-Hui Cho, who murdered 32 people at Virginia Tech. In his manifesto, he referred to Harris and Klebold as “martyrs.”
Psychiatrist Dr. Frank Ochberg explains that this hero worship is a key reason for the steady rise in killings since then. “It wasn’t so much the events themselves,” Dr. Ochberg has said, “but the aftermath—the mystery, the images—that became iconic and deeply affected people.”
7. Mass Killers Keep Track of Their Online Popularity
These killers are concerned about being watched, and this attention may even fuel their motives. Psychologist Dewey Cornell suggests that for some murderers, mass killings are a distorted way to gain 'recognition and respect.'
6. Live Coverage Endangers Victims
At times, the media does more than just fuel mass shootings. On occasion, they can directly put the lives of victims at risk.
Some of the most harrowing accounts of this issue stem from the terrorist attacks that rocked France over a three-day span in 2015, beginning with the January 7 shooting at Charlie Hebdo. On the third day, the Charlie Hebdo gunmen, Cherif and Said Kouachi, held hostages in a factory in Dammartin-en-Goele. The media broadcasted every detail—including the locations of the victims.
After alerting the authorities, Lilian Lepere took cover under a sink, hoping to remain undetected until help arrived. This became increasingly difficult when a radio station, RMC, disclosed his hiding place live. The situation worsened when French TV networks began to circulate this information nationwide.
They weren't the only ones exposing these hiding spots. On the same day, a similar situation occurred at the Hypercacher supermarket, where another terrorist, Amedy Coulibaly, was holding hostages. A cameraman from the BFMTV network saw a group of people seeking refuge in the cold room and chose to broadcast it live, revealing their position to a dangerous terrorist.
5. Interviewing Young Victims Exacerbates the Trauma
The day after the Parkland shooting, The Today Show invited survivor Samantha Grady, a young girl who had witnessed her best friend being shot and later learned of her friend's death. During her appearance, Samantha broke down in tears on live TV.
It's deeply upsetting to witness a teenage girl go through such trauma, but it's even more disturbing to see it broadcasted as entertainment on television.
That said, The Today Show was more considerate compared to the reporters covering the Sandy Hook tragedy. Before the victims had even left the school grounds, journalists were already interviewing children as young as eight, pressuring them to recount the horrific details they'd just endured.
This type of invasion into a child’s life goes beyond being rude; it’s actually harmful to their mental well-being. Child psychologists emphasize that the first 24 hours following a traumatic event are critical in determining the extent of the trauma. Forcing a camera into the face of a child who cannot refuse only amplifies the negative effects.
4. Early Coverage Often Misplaces Blame
The pressure to be the first to break a story can lead to major issues. News outlets, in their haste to identify the perpetrator of a mass shooting, sometimes end up accusing the wrong person. When your name is linked to a massacre, especially when you're innocent, it’s a deeply distressing experience.
This was the case for Salah Barhoum and Yassine Zaimi, two men whose photos were published on the cover of the New York Post with the headline: 'Feds seek this duo pictured at Boston Marathon.' The two men weren’t the bombers; in fact, they weren't even suspects by the time the paper was released. The police had simply wanted to question them, but they had already been cleared. However, convincing their neighbors they had no involvement in the bombing became a challenge once their faces were everywhere in the local supermarkets.
Similarly, Ryan Lanza, the brother of Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza, was wrongfully accused of being the killer. It wasn't just the New York Post who blamed him. CNN, Fox News, CBS, the Associated Press, and The New York Times also falsely reported that he was responsible for the massacre. This misidentification has affected countless others as well.
3. Altering Suicide Reporting Methods Was Effective
This isn't a mere hypothesis. The idea that adjusting the way we report on mass killings could reduce the number of copycat incidents is not some far-fetched notion—it's something we've already tried, and it worked.
In the 1980s, the United States saw a dramatic rise in suicides. Within a few years, the suicide rate tripled, becoming an epidemic. It was widely believed that this surge was due to the same 'contagion' effect that now fuels mass shootings.
In response, the CDC organized a national workshop to address the crisis. The outcome was a set of new guidelines: the media was advised to avoid using the word 'suicide' in headlines, refrain from detailing the method used, and stop labeling it as the 'inexplicable act of an otherwise healthy person.'
The media complied, and the results were striking. After the reporting changes, the suicide rate fell dramatically. This wasn't a one-off success—similar changes in reporting have been implemented in Hong Kong, the UK, and Vienna, where the adjustments led to an astonishing 75-percent decrease in suicide rates. Psychiatrists believe this approach could have the same impact again.
2. The Media Amplifies Killers' Messages
According to psychiatrist James Knoll, 'The media coverage given to mass shooting perpetrators has sent the message that committing a spectacular act of murder or killing is a great way to get attention.' This is particularly true when the killer has a message for the world. After all, when a mass murderer writes a manifesto, it becomes headline news.
This is a recurring issue. After the Columbine killers took the lives of 13 people, their journals and worldviews were broadcast to the world. Perhaps that same media attention influenced Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho, who meticulously prepared and sent his manifesto to the press before carrying out his attack.
The media also published Dylann Roof's manifesto, in which he called for a race war, after he opened fire at a church in Charleston, South Carolina. Later, they published Bryce Williams's manifesto after he shot a reporter and a cameraman. In his manifesto, Williams made it clear that his actions were inspired by Roof's writing. 'As for Dylann Roof,' he wrote, 'you want a race war? Bring it then!'
The FBI has made a direct request to the media, urging them to stop publicizing the manifestos of mass killers. By promoting the idea that mass killings are a means to express one's thoughts to the world, the FBI warns that this 'seriously jeopardizes the public’s safety by potentially inciting “copycats.”'
However, this request has not had the desired effect. Despite making the appeal in 2007, whenever a shooter writes a manifesto, it continues to make its way into the news.
1. The News Amplifies Unfounded Accusations Circulated Online
These individuals are not simply blamed due to a typographical error or a poor lead from law enforcement. Quite often, the media repeats whatever unfounded accusation an online troll might throw out, leading to anyone potentially seeing their face on the front page of a newspaper with a headline branding them a mass murderer.
This situation has occurred more than once. Before Stephen Paddock was confirmed as the shooter responsible for killing 58 people in Las Vegas, the site 4Chan decided to independently 'solve' the crime. With virtually no evidence, they accused an innocent man, Greg Danley, of the massacre. Soon, their unverified theory was one of the 'top stories' in Google News.
At times, these accusations have no good intentions behind them. After the San Bernardino shootings, an Internet troll successfully duped the Associated Press and CNN into believing she was a witness. The troll claimed that the shooter had said the massacre was over 'GamerGate' and the protection of the 'gamer' identity—an entirely fabricated story meant for amusement.
Perhaps the most tragic error occurred when Reddit users wrongfully accused Sunil Tripathi of being the Boston Marathon bomber. Tripathi, who had been battling severe depression, had been missing since March 16. His family, already anguished over his disappearance, now had to endure the false claims that he was behind the bombing. Tragically, Tripathi was later discovered to have taken his own life before the bombing even occurred.
