The case, which quickly garnered publicity given the missing girl's well-to-do background (she was part of an elite family) proved to be even more horrific with its confirmed linkage to Mexico's infamous drug wars.
Things got even more complicated as the parents themselves were declared possible suspects. In addition, unsettling details began to surface in this apparent nation-wide concern for the missing child: that the mother (possible suspect) was tired of being a mom, confessions and stories of marital infidelities, as well as countless private details about key family members just to name a few.
Undoubtedly, the story skyrocketed, especially as details did not add up, and as a ghastly discovery of the child's rotting corpse in her very own bedroom launched even more attention.
Overall, however, a fundamental issue surfaced above all: the role of the media outlets in this situation.
An article published in today's LA Times brought up the interesting question about press responsibility. At what point does covering a story trespass into outright sensationalism, into an "if it bleeds it leads" situation?
The article basically sums up the story, but goes into detail to explain the outright, almost aggressive style in which the story developed. While reporting important elements is necessary for any story, how necessary is it to go beyond the murder scene and reveal private details about the family?
You can check out the Los Angeles Times article for yourself by clicking here.
(Photograph: Paulette Gebarah Farah, courtesy of LA Times)
No comments:
Post a Comment