There’s never a dull day in journalism. One moment I could be flying in a private plane snapping photos of Junior Aviation Day, out on the back of a truck mere feet away from a 2,100 pound bison, in a media scrum with the premier or following a big story that’s gone international such as the horrific O’Brien/Liknes disappearance.
It’s fast paced and stressful as media outlets try to be the first to break the newest detail, but sometimes I have to question how far the media is willing to go.
Don’t get me wrong; media plays a vital role as a public watchdog and in disseminating information to the public. In addition to informing the public, the media often plays a vital role in helping police services appeal for witnesses and information about crimes and sharing ways to stay safe in emergency situations.
However, how far is too far? How much detail is too much?
Case in point, the murder of five young adults at a house party in the Calgary neighbourhood of Brentwood in April. It was touted as “the worst mass murder in Calgary history” and the media scrambled to get every gory detail.
Reporters rushed to get comments from grieving, shocked family members and I know at least one family sought the help of a friend who had media experience to deflect the onslaught of insensitive reporters.
That is the ugly side of journalism that I struggle with. I am an empathetic creature by nature and I cannot help but think of the devastation those families were going through and I know if I was in their shoes, I’d want nothing to do with reporters begging for now scared memories of my lost child.
But that has become part of the job. When tragedies like this happen, the public wants to know why it happened. They want answers and the media is there to give them those answers. To be perfectly honest, the reporter part of me wants these answers too.
On Nov. 17 the families of the Brentwood victims released a statement in response to the media’s request to unseal an Information to Obtain. If granted the “warrants surrounding the most graphic details of the crime” would be released to the media.
In the release from the families they state they struggle to understand the benefit to the public if this information was released before trial.
“Our priority as we try and rebuild our lives is to protect the dignity of our lost children and try and prevent the re-victimization of the young people who were traumatized by the events of April 15, 2014. They continue to relive every detail of that night, and the last thing any of us need at this time is additional anguish and sorrow,” the statement read.
I, like the families, do not see the benefit of releasing that information at this time.
The police are not looking for public input or help. The alleged perpetrator is in custody and the public is safe from him.
In addition, I don’t see how releasing details of the crime before a trial would benefit legal proceedings. If this case goes before a jury, I fear if the information is released the chances of finding a non-bias jury greatly diminishes. In that event, no one benefits.
The details will inevitably be released at trial and the media can learn of every single second of that horrendous night then.
Until that time, I have to put aside my need to update this “big story” and respect the families who wrote, “we chose to celebrate how they (the victims) lived, as opposed to glorifying how they died.”
