Well journalism in general, and broadcast journalism in particular, has been becoming more and more sensationalized in recent years. There has been a growing trend of abandoning factual information in light of eye-catching half truths, for instance, the whole "DateLine" expose on the himalaya accident. In the report they called the himalay ride a "rollercoaster". While we (enthusiasts) would not consider this a rollercoaster it's not technically incorrect, as the ride does run on rails. However, the terms connotation invokes thoughts of tall wooden and steel structures. And hey, that would draw more interest (i.e higher ratings, greate numbers of papers sold, more website hits). And as for the Columbine thing (since you brought it up) why did they do such in depth reporting on a suburban middle-class shooting as opposed to the other inner city, or rural area school shootings (e.g. Little Rock)? I'll tell you why, cause that appealed to the suburban middle class who spends the most money. Just my take on things, if you want to debate that further we can do it offline (email me a hostyl1@rollercoaster.com)
lata,
JCSN