Was it necessary to publicize shooter’s videos?

Scenes of the Stoneman Douglas shooter leering at his own cellphone camera as he announced he’d “be the next school shooter of 2018” were released by the State Attorney’s Office Wednesday, and their publication in the media set off a debate over whether the newsworthiness of such videos outweighs the harm they may cause.

Whether to publicize videos like the three found on the shooter’s cellphone is a decision that no newsroom takes lightly, and newspapers found different answers. Locally, the South Florida Sun Sentinel and the Miami Herald both ran the videos online. The Palm Beach Post instead linked to a story by WFTV Channel 9, which aired the videos. Nationally, the New York Times elected not to show them, while the Washington Post did.

“We understand how painful this can be, especially for the families and students directly touched by this terrible tragedy,” Sun Sentinel managing editor Dana Banker said. “It is not a decision we take lightly, but at the end of the day we must stand for truth and an informed public.

“While we describe what [he] said in our story, we also know that some people would rather see things directly and make their own judgments about the video, which is a public record.”

Both the Sun Sentinel and the Herald prefaced the videos with graphic content warnings. But while that may be enough to warn survivors who don’t wish to see them, it’s not going to stop copycats who, according to mass shooting experts, can be encouraged by witnessing other shooters.

“There is a copycat effect,” said Dr. Alan Lipman, a professor of psychiatry at George Washington University and founder of the Center for the