Whatever else, we know: attention on the killer on his terms helps inspire the next one. Or focus on methods. Don't. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/27/opinion/the-virginia-shooter-wanted-fame-lets-not-give-it-to-him.html …pic.twitter.com/u9wYXqQBNS
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
There is no need for videos of panicked people on loop, or the killer's face endlessly flashed to have a sensible coverage or discussion.
The road map to sensible coverage is possible, and I wrote about it in multiple pieces. Need editorial guidance—the opposite of censorship.pic.twitter.com/aiBG6K8h15
Understanding the role sensationalized attention plays doesn't mean ignoring other factors. Of course the world is multi-causal.
Many have been writing this for years. Zero headway. Media will talk about anything but media. People on social media better at restraint.
Media: the next potential mass shooter is watching the current media coverage intently. Right now. Your coverage is a factor in this crisis.
Yes, excessive focus on individual history is an illusion of knowledge and, sadly, a contributor to the problem.https://twitter.com/aj7773108/status/914852534380105729 …
I just wrote about how some academics in the field need just as much attention and piggyback on these tragedies to get their fix
Kind of like Trump. 
Similar phenomenon for far right / wack job politicians
We need to take all murders out of history books. We shouldn't recognize Booth, Oswald, or any murderer. Don't give them infamy.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.