'just caught up on old newspapers...the pile at my front door had gotten so big that it was no longer self-sustaining. in other words, any additional papers would only slide off the top. It was inevitable - something had to be done.

browsing the ongoing Laci Peterson coverage, and now this scoop, it makes me wonder....

Why these women?

I mean, no disrspect to Laci's family, but what distinguishes her from the hundreds? thousands? of pregnant women that are killed each year? I read here that outside of birth complications, homicide is the #2 killer of pregnant women...so unfortunately i'm guessing it's more like thousands.

So why the national media obsession over these one or two cases - especially if they're far from isolated incidents? Why leave the reader with the impression that these crimes are shockingly out of the ordinary - how ethical is that? Who's wagging the dog - is it the media who creates this demand, or does it truly stem from the public? Who pushed the snowball first that became an avalanche? (yes, i know that's an awkward metaphor...it's monday morning. f*ckin sue me.)

Why doesn't the media ever stress the point: "The Laci Peterson case is exemplary of an alarming, tragic trend that is growing in the U.S." Why not use all the hoopla to some useful purpose for raising awareness - a means to an end, as opposed to a means of simply generating more hoopla?

In fact, I take back the "no disrespect to Laci's family" comment. I think they get that I mean no disrespect. No, they have to worry about the Dateline NBC producer who's gonna knock down their door for the next exclusive expose - turning tragedy into profit. Do THOSE guys at least start out with "Um, no disrespect, but..."

What about Chandra Levy? Sure she was having an affair with a Congressman to single her out, but how well did we turn the corner? How effectively did we take that case and use the publicity and attention to monitor all the women her age who went missing in DC before and since?

JonBenet? Don't even get me started...

Since the public clearly has an insatiable appetite for these types of cases, would it kill (um, bad choice of words) to pull back the curtain on the bigger picture? To put these cases in their true shocking contexts - that they're just one among thousands?

Is that totally gonna kill the buzz? Is that gonna ruin the mood and make her put her clothes back on?

I know papers have a bottom line - they gotta make the cash. But I think they're too scared to lead the way in a dialogue, that they avoid stressing, or even reporting altogether facts that aren't very pleasant to deal with - that raise the bigger, fundamental questions. That shake the foundation, even. I'm not saying they have to go on some agenda-driven quest, but to actively shy away from reporting the facts, figures, and contexts that force people to ask the big questions...

I'm still an optimist. In other words, I'm an idiot. I think we can turn things around and report in a productive manner - in a way that would force the public to truly reflect on the prevalance of violence in our society, even if that style may be tough to swallow at first. I think the American people can adapt - I think they DO adapt. And if we gradually make intelligent, accurate, thought-provoking journalism the norm, then the people will eventually accept & go along.