Massacre at Virginia Tech
Cho Seung-hui was identified as the "lone gunman" suspected of killing 32 people in the nation's deadliest school shooting at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia Monday. It was revealed that two people were shot dead in a dormitory yearly yesterday and hours later 30 were found dead in Norris Hall while 29 others remain injured. Shortly after the shooting, the gunman committed suicide.
In an article printed in the New York Times, Roommates describe gunman as a loner, Marc Santora takes a personal stance on the issue by providing critical commentary from students and professors that knew the gunman. Although it is insightful and newsworthy to provide background on the shooter is is simply a narrative of his reputation on campus and does not fully indulge in the greater details and aftermath of the shooting. It also seems as though a majority of the quotes are unnecessary and say little about the man behind this bloody rampage.
In contrast, in an article on the Virginia Tech Shooter found on CNN.com offers a more critical analysis of this 23-year-old English major who was seen as a loner and had a reputation for writing graphic and disturbing stories while at the University.
"It was like something out of a nightmare," McFarland wrote in a blog. "The plays had really twisted, macabre violence that used weapons I wouldn't have even thought of. "
This article also touches on the fact that there were previous bomb threats that occured no more than a month ago and that the intricate details of the aftermath that followed yesterday's shooting and the severity of the massacre that the New York Times article doesn't even attempt to touch on. It is striking and absurd to consider that, ""There wasn't a shooting victim that didn't have less than three bullet wounds in them," said Dr. Joseph Cacioppo of Montgomery Regional Hospital. Overall the complexity and newsworthiness of the information provided in the article from CNN.com is far more informative and insightful than the narrative style of Marc Santora's article which barely touches on the greater issues at hand.