Internet Names the Wrong Killer

This is in response to an online article from Wired magazine about a 23 year old student who had been blamed early on for the recent Virginia Tech shootings. The student has a blog in which it is clear that he owns many fire-arms, and attends Virginia Tech. Recent posts had indicated him to be unhappy due to a recent break-up. Because of this circumstantial evidence, he was blamed by many people before the actual killer was found. Why were supposedly credible sources so quick to blame him, before they actually knew all the facts?

This is not uncommon. It seems the internet age has created competition among news organizations that value speed in delivery of the news over even the accuracy of the content. This was indicated in the 2000 elections where several news organizations called the election, then were forced to retract their claims, when it was still up in the air. With information traveling faster every day, the news organizations find that they need to stay just ahead of it, releasing news earlier and earlier, even though it can sometimes lead to mis-information.

This leads into another issue concerning the man's blog itself. Is that evidence enough to suspect someone? The fact that he shows he owns a lot of guns? Does a personal blog actually contain enough evidence to support some claim like this? Unfortunately, that may not matter. People look at blogs, or other websites such as Facebook or MySpace, to find out a lot about people. Potential employers look at these websites when considering candidates. It genuinely has an influence as to whether they get the impression that the applicant is of good moral character.

Honestly, I don't feel that there is anything wrong with this. Some people claim that what they do in their off time should not affect whether they get a job, but if that is an indication of how they will be performing at their work, then the employers have every right to judge based on this. Personally, I take the opposite approach. I try to use those to my advantage. Instead of posting pictures of me in a drunken stupor, or at wild parties, I put up examples of my work. I try to use these personal sites to make me look desirable.

Whether we like it or not, personal websites are going play a prominent figure in how people look at you. This can be good, or can be completely absurd like in the Virginia Tech incident. Either way, this is something we can at least try to understand. Maybe we should be careful how we portray ourselves online. After all, absolutely anybody can see it. Perhaps even more importantly, we should be skeptical of other information we see online. After all, we don't want to end up accusing the wrong person for murder again.