7
The top three stories on Radio NZ are about her, do we really need this much coverage?
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
7 points (88.9% liked)
NZ Off topic
407 readers
1 users here now
This community is for NZ discussion about random non-NZ things, or whatever you want! Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, something you found funny, anything goes!*
*except for:
- anything against the global instance CoC
- anything too controversial (keep it light-hearted)
If you want to have a serious political discussion, take it to [email protected].
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No? Why wouldn't a case like this get a lot of media attention?
They've published two stories about this on the 25th, another two on the 26th, and a fifth today.
That doesn't seem over the top to you?
High profile cases often get daily stories plus extras for background.
Also, those stories underneath the main one are there specifically because they are related. It's not like they ranked the top 3 stories and decided these were them.
But why is it a high-profile case? Who is she?
That's what gets me. It's a rare crime, a mother killing her children, but there's no great mystery to it, no real doubt over what happened, and not much public interest, from what I've seen. Nobody I know is talking about this in person, unlike the Lundy and Bain trials for example.
It's just odd.
It's high profile because of what she did, not who she is. It happened a couple of years ago but the trial is happening now hence why it's in the media all of a sudden.
It's not that unusual for a case with an alleged multi-murder to be in the media a lot during the trial as new information comes to light. Even so, it has dropped from the top spot now:
spoiler
Not really. The story shocked me when it first happened and still does.
Because despite being shocking and horrifying it's not actually all that relevant to anyone other than the immediate family and the justice system. It happened, it's horrible, and we don't really need to know more till there's an outcome to the trial. The constant updating feels grotesque. She's a mentally ill murderer, not a celebrity.
Yeah, I guess my perspective was that the media normally does this and so from that angle this case doesn't seem to be getting any more focus than normal.
I may have missed that there is opportunity here for a discussion on if that amount of coverage should be normal.
Fair point, this kind of thing is typical. I just wish it wasn't. I have no problem with true crime where the events and circumstances are examined after the fact in an objective way. What I dislike is how the families tragedy is being presented with constant updates and headlines designed to create an illusion of urgency and create clicks and pageviews.
I think that's a pretty reasonable position. We don't need up to date information as it's revealed in the trial.