Seattlest: Gibson Beats Haq, 888 to 236

Seth

Tue, 08 Aug 2006 12:06:44 -0800

I'd also like to point out that People magazine basically runs a cover story every time Tom Cruise drops a deuce, but in 2006 they've had ZERO cover stories about high school basketball. What the f-bomb? Here at Seattlest, we know what people really like.

Dan

Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:48:37 -0800

I don't know if this is a good comparison either. Haq was a surprisingly small story inside Seattle's walls and outside, but Gibson wasn't a particularly surprising big story or a particularly unwarrented big story.

James

Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:48:24 -0800

The first paragraph I didn't quote mentions the celebrity issue. More interesting to me: But if previous behavior and religious belief explain the burst of interest in the Gibson story, they only deepen the question of why the Seattle bloodshed was played down. Why the assumption that the Haq story was played down, rather than the Gibson story being played up? In other words, the Haq story may have been covered about as much as any other random shooting, but the Gibson story got a lot more coverage than the average crazy drunk ranting.

josh

Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:43:25 -0800

except that it doesn't seem that Haq was a jihadist, just a local nutjob loser murderer. maybe if Jacobs read a few of those 236 stories, he could have refined his "point".

Wells

Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:37:36 -0800

Why the disparity? Is he serious in posing this question? The answer seems very clear to me: Gibson is a huge massive celebrity and Haq a crazy nobody. Celebrities get a lot of play, crazy gunmen less so.

Seth

Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:37:05 -0800

Let's not beat up on the media too much. They have a consumer base. I'd like to see national click-thru numbers on stories about Mel vs. stories about Haq. People love celebrities.