Would like your opinions please... The story of the young girl in Clayton who was recently killed by her father...look...this story will be a story for a long long time. Every news cast i have seen you or Fox do on this story has mentioned that she was decapitated. Right now, the whole state of NC knows how this little girl was killed. You do not need to remind us in every story...on tv or website, how the girl was killed. Little children are hearing these words on tv and they dont need to hear them. Please do all of us a favor and when you speak or print this story from now on, just say she was killed by her father...allegedly. Please, there is no reason to keep saying over and over how she was killed. Their response today... The manner in which she was killed is an integral part of the story, and as such, it needs to be mentioned in every story. Also, not everyone sees or hears every story, so ignoring it after a first-day reference would prevent some people from getting all the information. Thanks for visiting WRAL.com. My opinion..just telling people that she was killed, a 4 year old, is bad enough. Do we really need to hear, in every story, how?
I understand where they are coming from & normally I like WRAL a lot, my favorite local station, but I would agree that it doesn't need to be mentioned over and over again. This story was picked up by the national news wires, if someone is that interested in it, they can research it to find out the ghoulish details. It must be terribly difficult for the mother for it to be repeated over and over. I've done my best to keep my 7 year old from hearing all the details, but it's pretty bad when you have to ban the local news.
Yeah! My 7 year old asked me what it meant. Sadly I told him. He was shocked someone would do that to a lil girl. I wonder how the courts plan to find a jury for this creep!
My husband and I were talking about this very same thing this morning. He said the exact same thing you did Lindenul. Like someone said earlier, it's all about ratings...
I like WRAL better than any of the other stations, but there are a few things about them that slightly annoy me. -First, they L-O-V-E to toot their own horn. Any disasters, they will not simply direct you to send donations to the Red Cross or Salvation Army. They have to tell you to send it in care of WRAL. There are other instances similar to this where they do a lot of self back-patting but I guess if you don't brag on yourself, who will? -Another issue I have is how recently they've added those readers' comments directly under legitmate news stories. Its looks too provocative IMO. Have a message board to discuss issues instead of directly under the news! - Lastly, their reporting as of late seems to be following in the national trend of overusing drama to sell their station. BREAKING NEWS: This just in, David Crabtree just came back from using the restroom. More details on the 5:30 News. Of course, then you have WTVD, who besides Larry "been here forever" Stogner, changes news personnel like they do their underwear and insist on such a boring format that you tend to nod off while watching. Are their even any other news stations? I know there are, but they do little to compete with WRAL. I think Time-Warner 14 is more interesting than WTVD and the others.
blah blah blah. they still show video on 9/11. but i would pay to watch this guy hang by his balls with fish hooks.
Up to this point, I'm really surprised that this story hasn't caught fire on that national level no more than it has. You had the story about the two kidnapped boys and now the mother who died drinking the water for the contest. Certainly, its not a pleasant story but considering the media's love for harping on horrific and gory details, I suprised that MSNBC or FOX hasn't swooped in by now. Maybe the story just doesn't have enough details yet to talk about for 5 straight hours. When in doubt, they've always got the LaCrosse team to over analyze. Heck, the story about the Pitt Bull and it gnawing off the baby's toes got more press than this has. Strange to say the least.
Because of stories like the murder of this little girl, I don't allow my 5 & 7 year olds to watch the news. If there is a weather event or other appropriate story on the news, then I will watch it with them and then turn it off. Otherwise, I don't watch the news until 11:00 pm most nights, when they are sound asleep. You just never know what they are going to show or say. The other night I was shocked to hear the 911 call from the little girl's mother playing on WRAL. I had to turn it off and I can't imagine letting my little ones hear that. There is enough for them to worry about as it is without the horror of constant violent crime on the news.
I know what you mean Frugal, between the Duke LaCrosse debacle and everything else, we pretty much have just had to make sure he's not around for the news either. I don't want to shelter him too much, but they don't need to know that some father decapitated their own child!
If my girls watch the news and have questions, I just explain it to them. This is the world we live in today and they usually hear about things at school, before I have a chance to watch it on the news.
This is my first post but been around forever. I need to comment on this subject though. I was watching the "severe weather coverage" this morning before deciding to come to work and it was getting to be about 9:00. Ok to me if you are going to break into regular scheduled programming then you should at the very least talk about the weather. I was sitting there watching, wanting to know about the roads in Raleigh, and they said "we have some other news to tell you about this hour". It was the SAME thing they reported at their "normal" news time. I felt I was watching the noon news not the severe weather coverage. I know that they get on their trip about covering every inch of the storm over and over again but if you are going to talk about what you are going to be talking about again in 3 hrs then why not go back to regular programming? Anyway, that is my problem with them at least today anyway.
I agree! Seems they'll use any excuse to stay on the air, huh? Oh, they did eventually say that Dr. Phil will air at, something like, 2:07 in the AM. :roll:
I turned on WRAL this AM just in time to catch the gal that drove in from Fuquay's televised story of her morning commute. It was almost painful to watch and contained no good information. Reminded me of a "how I spent my summer vacation" report written by a fourth grader! And seriously, what is wrong with that time slot for Dr. Phil???
:lol: But, you never know... "This could be a defining moment in your life." :mrgreen: (I'll watch it at 5:00 on Fox 50 while I'm making dinner -- unless they need that air time for "storm" coverage too. :roll: )
What I hate about the news (not that WRAL does it very often), is when the commercial says: "An activity that could save your life, but only if you start right now. These and other stories tonight at eleven."
It isn't so much that they report it over and over and OVERRRRRRRR...it's the sensationalism attached to it; The 911 recording and the recording of the answering machine at the house; no one needed to hear the horror in that woman's voice and no one had to hear the answering machine at the house. To say what and how it happened is more than enough without airing that horrific phone call!
