The ritualized rifling through old internet accounts usually muddies the story more than it informs the public.

It’s a weird headline, but the discussion is around how journalists and the public look through internet history in cases like this. Some of it is helpful, some of it is not.

In particular, it’s a response to this article:

‘Extremely ironic’: Suspect in UnitedHealthcare CEO slaying played video game killer, friend recalls (NBCNews)

The game in this case being AmongUs…

Monday night, NBC News published an article with the headline “’Extremely Ironic’: Suspect in UnitedHealthcare CEO Slaying Played Video Game Killer, Friend Recalls.” This article is currently all over every single one of my social media feeds, because it is emblematic of the type of research I described above. It is a very bad article whose main reason for existing is the fact that it contains a morsel of “new” “information,” except the “information” in this case is that Luigi Mangione played the video game Among Us at some point in college.

cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/72744

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.worldEnglish
    7·
    20 hours ago

    The article reads like regular internet bad behavior.

    there is rarely a single story everyone is talking about and where it is impossible to hold anyone’s attention for more than a few minutes at a time…

    Exactly what the press contributes to.

    Goes on to suggest digging through old accounts, maybe finding the right person of interest, making stuff up based on what you find, then harassing people associated with the person.

    But that’s ok, because it’s “journalism.”