... or read any news article about him, at least ones that are identifiably so, regarding the Virginia Tech shooter. I'm one step away from writing letters to editors and advertisers.

The public has a right to know, yes. This is like saying that Kitten has a right to food. To give the public what it wants is like giving Kitten ice cream for every meal, as the main course. She wants it, yes. But even she knows it's not healthy.

I forgot who said the following quote, but the lack of attribution makes it no less valid: "The job of the journalist is to report the news, not make the news." In this case, the media is enabling these psychopaths, giving them the platform they seek with their malignant flame-outs.

This applies to religious extremists of any bent, be they abortion-provider killers or those following some twisted sense of jihad. This applies to terrorists of any stripe, from the Oklahoma City bombers to some crankshaft with more bullets than sense. This applies to any nutcase out there who thinks that killing many people will gain them the voice and immortality that they cannot earn from diligence and hard work.

If the media were not so guaranteed to broadcast these lurid manifestos, these masturbatory self-love letters written in others' blood, then these lunatics would be less inclined to take innocent lives. Will it stop them? No. Will it deter the most sociopathic? No. Would it make Columbine or Virginia Tech or the second grade-school hostage incident (from two weeks back) less likely? Yes. I say yes. If only by a percent, yes.

Is it worth it? Can I live with the press censoring itself? I, who have advocated the importance of the freedom of the press so often in this forum? If it can mean one less senseless death, then yes. It's worth it.

It's worth not inspiring copycats. It's worth not subjecting the families of the deceased (including the perpetrator's family) to the repeated agonies of re-living that moment when they learned they would not have another summer together. It's worth not promising immortality to others, not copycats, but those otherwise intent on causing an even more indelible stain on our memories.

In being accomplices to these madmen by giving them voice, the media is pandering to the public's base desires. Yes, at the root of it, the public is at fault. But, the public is not the party in this equation with the multi-million dollar information infrastructure. The public does not have the cameras, the sets, the webmasters, and servers.

With great power comes great responsiblity.

Who said that? A media company (Spider-Man 3). Time for them to practice what they preach.