
I am Facebook friends with Ryan Lanza - evo_9
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/i_am_facebook_friends_with_ryan_lanza/
======
DanielBMarkham
When we built the net, we had great dreams about every person on the planet
connecting to each other and all the information they might need to make their
lives better.

What we're actually building is something more like a cross between a tavern,
a opium den, and a public square. People hang out in various random emotional
moods, all waiting for something to trigger them into acting like a mob.

I know that sounds like hyperbole, but it's real. We are creating a system for
over-reacting in a big way. Sometime -- sometime soon - some innocent person
is going to get killed by one of the internet mob phenomenons. It's a miracle
it hasn't happened already.

The interesting question is: what happens then? Does the net somehow correct
itself? Or do the swings get wilder and wilder, ending up in 2050 or so with
little bits of the net attacking little other bits in widely strewn locations?
(What would be the term for this? Internet gangs? New nation-states? Niche
warfare?)

~~~
mtoddh
This. I think the author really highlighted this well at the end of the
article:

"Social media purports to connect us but it often does the exact opposite. The
barrier, the anonymity, the lack of accountability; all encourage the worst in
people."

~~~
ndonnellan
Perhaps because of the sheer number of people the internet has connected
combined with the bell curve of asshole-ness, we think humanity is stupider
than it is. Anonymity, unaccountability may certainly make things worse, but a
small fraction multiplied by an insanely large number will still give us a lot
of crazies.

------
rekwah
RE: Facebook Groups

I've never understood the psychological reasons behind pointless social
commentary during moments of tragedy such as this.

My social media streams were full of blather: "I feel bad for the parents and
kids", "I hate school shooters", "I hate kid killers!!...ad nauseum. No
kidding! There is a support group for people like you, it's called Everybody.

Why comment at all? Is it some coping mechanism? Do they feel as if they will
be judged because they didn't publicly admonish the shooter?

~~~
ahelwer
Before taking a crack at answering this for you, I'd like to know - how did
you feel when you heard about the shooting? What was your reaction? Would you
generally describe yourself as an empathic person?

~~~
rekwah
I would say that I was/am sympathetic, not empathetic. I recognize that it's a
tragedy for them, but I don't feel similar emotions.

I'm curious if the reason behind such vocalization is because very few people
actually feel empathy. A facade for their feelings of joy/relief that such
things didn't occur to someone they know.

I, as you probably guessed, don't have any children. I presume my feelings on
the subject would be different if that weren't the case.

~~~
catshirt
with respect (i am speaking retro-introspectively)- i cannot understand how
recognizing that your feelings would change with perspective isn't enough in
and of itself to change them.

to me, admitting your feelings would change with perspective is admitting you
simply cannot relate to what these people are going through. if your lack of
empathy is derived from the inability to relate- that seems awfully selfish.

but at the same time, "i cannot pretend to relate with what these people are
going through" sounds refreshingly empathetic if you ask me.

------
arscan
The case of the mistaken identity of Neda Soltani in 2009 during the Iranian
protests is worth reading:

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20267989>

> _The whole thing happened in a matter of 12 days. In less than two weeks I
> had gone from being a professor of English literature, leading a very normal
> life, to a person who had to flee her homeland._

All because somebody mistook her facebook profile for someone else's

~~~
pycassa
Wow.. speechless..

------
purplelobster
Ugh, I feel bad for the guy. His entire life will probably be tainted by this.
Any future employer, friend, lover can and will find out about it through a
simple Google search. He's probably the worst of after this incident; his
brother a mass murder, his mother shot dead, him being tainted for the rest of
his life...

~~~
genwin
I wouldn't feel too bad for someone who gets to retire in their 20s, after the
settlement checks start rolling in. He could probably start his lifetime
vacation now, by getting a loan against the anticipated proceeds.

~~~
koudelka
That's because you're an idiot. His mom is dead, he can't talk to his friends
and his life is certainly in danger. His life is _shattered_ , he can't buy a
new one.

~~~
genwin
Nothing stops him from talking to his friends. Re his mom, I'm referring only
to his loss of reputation. He's in danger from idiots; moving to a liberal
area should help. He'll be able to afford some decent security in any case,
like any multi-millionaire.

~~~
jspthrowaway2
Regardless of how those of us on Hacker News identify politically, your shot
at conservatives is out of line. I identify liberally and even I see it as
inappropriate. I'm not being hyperbolic when I inform you that comments and
opinions like yours are the kind that will be the end of America and
everything that we believe in as we know it. Political conversation in this
country is a time bomb.

Beyond that, pretty much every comment you've left in this thread is
cancerous, insensitive, and outright stupid, and I wish you'd stop typing. I
mean that in the most respectful way.

~~~
catshirt
just because you say something isn't hyperbolic, doesn't mean it's not.
likewise, just because you say something is respectful, doesn't mean it is.

"liberal" and "conservative", as you don't seem to be aware, have meanings
outside of United States politics.

~~~
jspthrowaway2
I am aware, but since the advice was to move and the guy lives in America, I
localized my answer.

------
fleitz
Plain old mob mentality, something bad happened, no one likes it, the suspect
is dead, someone must be punished, anyone tangentially related is fair game.

Might as well string up the person who sold him a pack of gum last week.

~~~
ecspike
This type of thing is precisely why, after seeing what happened to Richard
Jewell after the '96 Olympics bombing, when a tragedy like this happens, I try
to stay clear of anything that mentions the killer's name/motivations/etc for
a couple days until there is a clearer picture.

~~~
danenania
"I try to stay clear of anything that mentions the killer's
name/motivations/etc for a couple days until there is a clearer picture."

A journalist with any shred of integrity should do the same.

~~~
meepmorp
24 hour news cycle. Gotta fill the time, and any shred of anything
information-like helps add to the discussion.

Every time something happens, the networks fall over themselves to get out the
new thing first, and inevitably fuck it up. Recall the Obamacare ruling, and
how several networks reported it'd been overturned because they couldn't take
the ten minutes to read more carefully.

~~~
danenania
Of course they have logical reasons for acting unethically, just as a common
thief has a logical motive for snatching purses. That doesn't make the
behavior any less unethical.

~~~
meepmorp
Oh, I agree that it's unethical. And, frankly, detrimental to our society.

------
nmridul
Is there a way to publicly shame the reporter ? Instead of just naming it as
"cnn" or any other name without a face, it would be better to name the
reporter and the editor. And also link to their Facebook page.

Next time it could keep other reporters in line.

------
loceng
"We have a problem with rushing to judgment."

This is the key statement, and the behaviour perpetuated and taught by news
outlets. They should be held hugely liable for misinformation and lies that go
out -- sure, they legally, in the U.S. at least, have been found to be allowed
to lie, but that doesn't mean they aren't liable.

P.S. I somewhat hope Ryan Lanza's Facebook account was unsearchable prior to
Facebook changing all accounts to being searchable - I'd like to see if any
legal consequences could come of it.

------
JudgingRyan
Does anyone care what this must have done to him? He finds out by watching CNN
at work, that his mother has been murdered, along with 20 small children & 6
adults, & that HE is being blamed for it. He is receiving hate mail on his FB
page, people are threatening to kill him, all while he rides the business home
alone. This is how he spends the first hour after finding out that his family
is gone & that it was his little brother who killed his mother. And then the
"kind" police officers escort him out in handcuffs for all the world to see.
been one week since this tragedy & nowhere do I see anyone reaching out with
kindness towards this 24 year old. The media could care less. He has the
weight of all 28 victims on him. I cannot imagine his pain, fear, & intense
sadness. So, when this country is asked to pray for those who lost loved ones,
why in the name of God is he not being included? That is my question & I doubt
that he would ever consider suing anyone, even though they deserve it. But
I'll tell you what he deserves... grace, loving thoughts, & kindness, just as
much as every else who lost someone they loved. My heart breaks for him.

~~~
dixlynn57
I agree with you, This poor young mans life has just been turned around on
him. I can't imagine what he is going through,all the question he must have. I
do think he should sue and a meaningful gesture on his part would be to give
the money back to the community in one way or another. I pray that he can get
through this with Gods grace.

------
JudgingRyan
Does anyone care what this must have done to him? He finds out by watching CNN
at work, that his mother has been murdered, along with 20 small children & 6
adults, & that HE is being blamed for it. He is receiving hate mail on his FB
page, people are threatening to kill him, all while he rides the business home
alone. This is how he spends the first hour after finding out that his family
is gone & that it was his little brother who killed his mother. And then the
"kind" police officers escort him out in handcuffs for all the world to see.
been one week since this tragedy & nowhere do I see anyone reaching out with
kindness towards this 24 year old. The media could care less. He has the
weight of all 28 victims on him. I cannot imagine his pain, fear, & intense
sadness. So, when this country is asked to pray for those who lost loved ones,
why in the name of God is he not being included? That is my question & I doubt
that he would ever consider suing anyone, even though they deserve it. But
I'll tell you what he deserves... grace, loving thoughts, & kindness, just as
much as every else who lost someone they loved. My heart breaks for him.

------
aes256
The lack of critical thinking skills is perhaps my biggest gripe with
humanity, and one that I believe underpins, in one way or another, all of its
other failings.

If everyone had perfect critical thinking skills, misreporting such as this
would cause no harm. There would be no need for defamation laws.

A news organization would make an incorrect assertion, and instead of leaping
to conclusions, people would interrogate the assertion, evaluate the
supporting evidence themselves, and reserve judgment until the facts are
clear.

In the meantime, if you can't help but discuss or act on information of
questionable accuracy, qualify yourself appropriately. "If Ryan Lanza was the
person responsible, he is a monster!", not "Ryan Lanza is a monster!", etc.

------
JudgingRyan
"riding the bus home", not business. Journalism today is NOT CNN or MSNBC, or
FOX. It's the corporate heads who demand results... right now! Everything is
faster, more, now. It doesn't matter if it's true, just that it is EXTREME.
Even on Dateline, which aired that Friday night, they reported that Mrs. Lanza
was the kindergarten teacher & that's why Adam killed all of "her" students.
WRONG! Shut off the TV & wait for the early edition of the New York Times.
That's about the only way to get "real" journalism anymore. At least they
apologize when they're wrong.

------
ecspike
"In the end, social media got to the answer of who Ryan Lanza is much more
quickly than a dozen local reporters would have done. But social media also
creates a world in which we are watching the investigation — and reporting —
unfold in real time."

A local reporter, in this case the usage seems pejorative, might have wanted
until they were certain before printing the name and therefore might not have
needed a retraction. I would have respected them more if they just said that
news moves fast and they make their money from ads so being the first mover
improves their bottom line.

------
monochromatic
> We have a problem with rushing to judgment.

... says a guy who, in the wake of a tragedy, rushes to say that we need more
gun control.

~~~
untog
Where does he say that?

~~~
monochromatic
> There a lot of things we need to have a “national discussion” about in
> America — gun laws and access to mental health care being the two most
> important . . . . We’ve decided that access to guns is more important than
> our safety, that more guns equals safety

Sounds to me like a man who has made up his mind.

~~~
untog
He doesn't say that we need more gun control, though. He has described the
situation as he sees it, but he hasn't prescribed an answer, aside from a
"national discussion", which by it's nature involves an exchange of opinions,
not an answer from on high.

~~~
philwelch
Gun control is (or was) a fairly settled issue. Even James Carville said, "I
don't think there's a Second Amendment right to own a gun, but I think it's a
loser political issue." The only reason to unsettle it is if you wanted to
change it, and since it's considered a civil right by many Americans, that's a
pretty big deal.

If you want to better understand that sentiment, just substitute any other
Constitutionally guaranteed civil right for "guns". "We need to have a
national discussion about the right to a fair trial by jury." How does that
not sound sinister? It's fairly settled that we have fair trials by jury, or
at least try our hardest, and it doesn't serve any good purpose to reopen the
question.

~~~
hga
In _D.C. vs. Heller_ , all nine Supreme Court Justices agreed "there's a
Second Amendment right to own a gun" (the so-called individual right, vs. the
"collective right" that had been claimed for decades), they just split on if
this meant anything (D.C.'s ban on new gun registrations was total, and they
effectively banned the use of any grandfathered guns for self-defense).

It is now settled law, there's very little to have a "national discussion" or
"conversation" about, especially since we all agree on minor details like:
murder is wrong and is properly illegal, felons and the severely mentally ill
have no right to own guns (although due to privacy issues it's very hard to do
anything about the latter, and too many states like Pennsylvania refuse to
report this to the feds), people should treat guns with respect, etc.

------
RivieraKid
Events like this shooting always remind me of Goerge Carlin talking about
entropy:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egRgweL12Uc&feature=yout...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egRgweL12Uc&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Watch it, it's really good.

------
jspthrowaway2
From the linked through article on BuzzFeed:

> _Media did not identify the "wrong Ryan Lanza." BuzzFeed, Gawker and
> Mediaite correctly reported on the Facebook profile of the person who turned
> out to be the older brother of the alleged gunman — and they did so when he
> was the person being identified by law enforcement to CNN as the shooter._

This is wrong in a few ways. First:

As I understand it, "identified by law enforcement" was some guy in the
Connecticut State Police talking to the media without authorization. The
designated media contact of the local police, Lt. Vance, was correcting
misinformation that was perpetuated by the media and Internet _all day_. Ryan
Lanza was only one of many "facts" that grew legs and ran around the planet,
to borrow from Twain. There were so many rumors, many of them perpetuated by
the awful "This Just In" live blog on CNN, that were just shown to be
blatantly untrue less than an hour later.

I've seen "This Just In" get it so horribly wrong on stories in the interest
of speed in the past, particularly with Hurricane Sandy and Twitter (like when
they wrote about the stock exchange being flooded based on some Twitter troll,
and all the networks ran with it). Real news organizations, like the old
stalwarts of CBS & Co., like to wait for a double confirmation. It appears
that "This Just In" is being treated as a confirm (since "CNN reported it") by
many organizations, even though the bar for truth is abysmally low on that
blog. They don't even retract, even though they have the capability. They
_leave_ the untruth published, but update later saying "earlier we reported a
lie. Sorry 'bout that, it isn't true".

Second:

They didn't "correctly report on the older brother". Half of the developed
world ran a story similar to "LOOK AT THE FACE OF THIS STONE COLD KILLER. HERE
HE IS". Whatever BuzzFeed needs to tell themselves to sleep better at night, I
guess.

Third:

There is an argument that has taken hold in Europe that we should never
identify the killer, or omit their last name, in circumstances like this. I
sympathize with it extensively, along with the notion that we shouldn't run
24-hour coverage on this to glorify the killer (a common complaint from
criminal psychiatrists). If it were against the rules to identify a killer,
this would have never happened.

This is why all news organizations should double-confirm before ever releasing
a fact with as much gravity as this. Hell, double-confirm everything. The
irresponsibility displayed by the media and the ease of which a life can be
destroyed in the age of the Internet are simply too dramatic for rush
decisions any more. We need to have a culture shift toward being acceptable to
waiting a few minutes to be told something is going on, if it means we can be
more sure that we're reporting the truth. What point is a fact that we know
within seconds if it's not even a fact? If journalism is reporting untruths,
what purpose does journalism have in the public interest?

I entirely blame CNN here, and "This Just In" specifically. They got somebody
to talk to them in the State Police who didn't know what he was talking about,
they ran with it, and they ruined this kid's life. I'd like to see "This Just
In" closed entirely, and the Associate Producer that got the duty of updating
the blog post that day apologize personally to Ryan.

There is a systemic disease developing inside CNN, completely due to the Web,
and it's beginning to infect downstream media. Please, CNN producer if you're
reading this (which you should be if you're searching for tech stories), _be
better_.

~~~
untog
I don't understand why law enforcement officials leak this stuff. Presumably
they aren't benefitting financially (that would be highly illegal, and surely
investigated?), and they aren't ever named publicly, so they don't even get
fame out of it. So why risk your job like that?

~~~
jackpirate
You scratch a journalist's back, they'll scratch yours when the time comes.

Plus, there's always accidental slip ups.

