We have a nice debate going at the end of the previous post. Here's a recap. KWCH did a story about a bus stop in Haysville placed across the street from the house where a convicted sex offender resides. You can view the story with the link down below. (Video has now been added).
http://kwch.com/Global/story.asp?S=7222967&nav=menu486_2_2
In it they mentioned the name of the convicted sex offender. I watched the story and didn't really think much about it, until I received this comment Today on the blog:
Anonymous said...
What do you think about KWCH's decision to show the sex offender's name, picture, and home. I know legally it's fine, and the information's out there if someone wants it, but it seemed a little unnecessary. It didn't add anything to the story.
October 17, 2007 2:03 PM
I then responded that I could see it a number of ways. One, the offender was convicted in 1998 and since he is convicted it is readily available public record as well as on the Kansas Sex offender Registry. From that perspective you could argue that you could broadcast his name. Two, on the other hand one could argue he is trying to move on with his life and if he hasn't re offended since, then he is indeed moving on. Now one could counter that argument by saying the victim in the case didn't have a choice in the matter and probably still suffers mentally from the incident. I received a number of comments on this and here they are:
Anonymous said...
When someone is charged and convicted of a crime it is public record. This is not an accusation that hasn't worked its way through the courts.
October 17, 2007 6:08 PM
Anonymous said...
No one is suggesting KWCH didn't legally have the right to do what it did.The question is what is gained from putting this guy's name, home, and picture out there for this particular story?I personally don't see why it was necessary. The guy's identity was irrelevant to the issue.
October 17, 2007 7:38 PM
Anonymous said...
I think at some point in time you have to let sleeping dogs lie. Has he re-offended since 1998? Did he choose to live in front of a school bus stop that wasn't there until this year? I feel we should have mentioned where he lived, and his crime, but not his name or shown his picture. Just a personal opinion, but I think this guy's had 9 years to make a life for himself. It's unfair a news station can ruin that for him in 1:30.
October 17, 2007 7:40 PM
Anonymous said...
He assaulted a child. You have no right to privacy or anonimity after that.
October 17, 2007 9:52 PM
I'd like the dialog on this topic to continue on this entry. I also posted a poll question on this, probably against my better judgement. I am afraid it will turn it into a battle between those from KWCH VS the rest of the stations. If you are in the business, I want everyone to try to distance yourself from your station and think of it neutrally, if only for a few minutes. I would like to continue the dialog right below this entry where the last comment left off from the last post. -Hal
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Sex offenders cannot be cured. That is a fact that has been proven time and time again by study after study. That is why they are so dangerous.
KAKE routinely gives out names of people arrested for crimes before they are charged. Is that responsible? Nothing has been proven. It is simply an allegation.
KWCH made the right choice here. They weighed the public's right to know (and be safe) and a convicted felon wanting to keep his name out of the headlines. It's a no brainer.
If this guy didn't want his name out there he should not have assault a child. How anyone can have sympathy for this person is beyond me.
Just because something is public record or public knowledge doesn't mean you go on air with it. This blog is public record that Hal doesn't know a damn thing about what he writes of, yet that is not reported.
In general, sex offenders are dangerous and should not be around children. But, this story was about sex offenders in general...not this particular offender.
Yes, his name and picture are public record because of his actions. However...the only reason he was singled out in this case is because a school bus stop happened to be in front of his home. It's not something that "he" did to provoke, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Yes, saying a sex offender lives there was necessary for the story. But, the story wasn't about him.
Now, I would feel entirely different about this if there was reason to believe that he was a threat to those children. (i.e.: peeking out his window, just happens to be mowing his lawn while kids are out at the stop, etc.) But, without that provocation - simply saying a sex offender lives there was sufficient without bringing his name and picture into the story.
From the story, it sounds like all the people living in the area knew who this guy was. So I don't see how KWCH is keeping them any more safe by broadcasting the guy's name across the state.
Anyone who assaults a helpless kid should be tarred and feathered in public for the rest of their lives. Why should they deserve any sort of anonymity? If I had sex offenders next door, you'd better believe I'd want to know. If only it was legal for these sick perverts to wear signs on their forhead for the rest of their lives saying "i like children".
Defending a sex offender. I am ashamed of the posts on here. This story was about a PARTICULAR sex offender living next to a PARTICULAR bus stop. It was relevant. If you don't believe in giving people all the information and censoring what you think they should know, then you have no business in this field.
The KWCHer who posted better watch themselves. You are dangerously close to giving out information that should be kept in house at any station.
KAKE tonight ran a story on warrant sweeps. They showed police arresting people. No one is up in arms about this story. These people have not been convicted or sentenced. At least the guy in KWCH's story was.
Post a Comment