CNN = Garbage

A day before the one-year anniversary of the Virginia Tech shooting, CNN has published an article about the suicide of a student at VT.

William Kim still calls the cell phone of his son, a 21-year-old senior at Virginia Tech, just to hear his voice. He feels cheated out of a chance to save his only boy.

His son, Daniel Kim, wasn't a victim of last year's massacre that left 32 students and professors dead. His son committed suicide eight months later, after falling into a deep depression.

A Korean-American, Kim feared that classmates might mistake him for shooter Seung-Hui Cho.

"They treated it like some kind of joke," William Kim said of the way the university handled his son's warning signs.

Hmmm... I wonder what they're trying to imply? Why I bet they're trying to draw a parallel! Surely they're trying to survey VT's policies to tie together the Cho case with the student in the more recent event!

Notice the weasely way in which the article tries to draw the two events together.

  • Kim wasn't a victim of the massacre. And I'm not the Pope.
  • Kim was a Korean-American. How very eerie considering the dearth of Korean-Americans at engineering schools!
  • Kim feared that others would mistake him for the shooter. Look at all the evidence the authors present to back up that statement!

After drawing this self-evident parallel, CNN describes how VT came up short once more. One of Kim's online World of Warcraft buddies sent an email to the VT health center saying he was worried about Kim. The health center then called the cops who went to Kim's off-campus apartment to check up on him. They left his apartment a short while later. Clearly VT left him dangling!

This is a bullshit article, a hatchet job by two people, Abbie Boudreau and Scott Zamost, who are not looking for truth, only sensationalism. They have no business being journalists.

Suicides happen at every university. No details are given of what actually happened when the cops met Kim. Did he present himself as not being depressed? Would others have handled the situation the same way? Did the cops try to set him up with psychiatrists? Those facts are not explored.

There is also clearly a matter of personal responsibility at play here. Universities can only do so much. They can't make someone not kill themselves if the person is determined to do it. Other institutions surely had influence as well but are never called into question - the family, the church (if the student attended one), his friends, his roommates, etc. The authors are trying to portray a systemic failure on the part of VT but have presented no proof that such exists. I understand a grieving father trying to find fault somewhere. But I expect reporters to be less biased.

Leaving aside all those facts, given the time of the piece and the ridiculous parallels the authors try to draw between the deadliest school shooting in history and the suicide of a single troubled college kid way back in December, the piece is simply an attempt to ruin the reputation of Virginia Tech. It reeks.

Share this

But a child is dead- how can

But a child is dead- how can you trivialize that?

By pointing out...

... that he's 21 and therefore not a child.  ;)

know the facts before you post

Just how much do you know about this incident?
Maybe you have a score to settle with CNN but I am sure they did investigate before put this on the air.
You should at least conduct you own investigation before posting any negative comments.
Without any knowledge of this incident, doesn't qualify you as someone who should make any comment at all, negative or not.

Exactly how much

Exactly how much investigation would be required on the author's part to realize they were sensationalizing using last year's tragedy, given that the article itself mentions that this suicide took place over four months ago? They didn't spend all this time researching Kim, they held onto his story until it seemed more relevant again, which is horrible any way you slice it. The time issue alone lends significant credence to the other parallels that were pointed out without establishing any significant connection with facts.

And, again, since when must a person be an expert in a field to criticize another's work? There's nothing here claiming that the article is lying or hiding the truth, merely that there are a lot of unbacked statements and some heavy bias that anyone with a criticial eye can spot. There's no need to, and in fact no point in researching this case to tell that the article is shameful journalism, even if the investigation that lead to it was sound.

What's wrong with timing?

Why do I see people crying over timing of this broascast?
Why can't a network air a program that will bring out the truth about just how much schools had or had not changed?
Biased? How is it biased when a reporter was trying to get answers to what Ms. Hike wrote to newspaper.
Here is the link; http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/2008/02/06/letter__misconceptions_drawn_from_sources__statements_in_recent_article
Read it and compare, maybe the reporter wasn't so biased after all.
Ms. Hike should've answered those questions from the reporter since she mentioned so many things in that letter. Implying that the father is the one to be blamed.
Another thing this auther said, 'this is a bullshit article'. How is it a bullshit article? It is clear that Ms. Hike didn't have any answers. If you had a chance to watch the video of 'Campus Rage'then you could see it clearly. It was disgusting to watch Ms. Hike wiggle her way out of questions, even smiling at camera. What is there to smile about when she is talking about a student's death?
All the statements can be backed with evidences and witnesses. It is the answers from Ms. Hike, they were so vague, that makes you wonder.
It is total failure of VT. to follow their so called protocols. Not even one step of their protocols were followed.

»

Well

I don't care much for CNN, but this article is certainly the pot calling the kettle black. This is a totally worthless website.