As most of you know, I am often highly critical of those who work in the mainstream media. I still am, because I truly believe that, more often than not, my criticisms are fully justified.
Whether for ideological, agenda-driven purposes or from a simple desire to get a bigger slice of the media pie at any cost, members of the media mislead us each and every day. Some of them even outright lie to us.
Sometimes though, one of them will just make an honest mistake. Perhaps a lapse in judgment, perhaps simply an inability to keep up with the maelstrom of information that swirls around a particular story as it unfolds. But still, a mistake. And then the weasely son of a bitch still tries to worm his way out from under it, rather than admit he was wrong.
Alleged link to killer an insult to victim Emily
I am very pleased to say that the TO Sun’s Thane Burnett is not such an individual. Thane screwed up. Big. But instead of puking up a bunch of weasel-talk and trying to shift off the blame, Thane stood up, admitted what he did, said in no uncertain terms that it was wrong, accepted the consequences and took it like a man [aw, crud; the feminists are gonna poop on me now…]:
BLACKSBURG — In the stampede that followed the massacre at Virginia Tech, victim Emily Hilscher was cut again and again.
Including by me.
Emily was likely the first of Cho Seung-Hui’s victims here, along with Ryan Clark, inside West Ambler Johnson residence. Clark had rushed to her aid when he heard the first shots of the day on Monday.
Police have not officially called Cho the pair’s executioner, because while the same weapon was used in their deaths as the 30 others inside Norris Hall a few hours later, they have not proven that connection beyond their own professional benchmark.
Which is a good reason to bring me back to 18-year-old Emily, and the insult news writers like myself placed on her memory. In most early stories — including my own for Sun Media — Emily was offhandedly referred to as a possible girlfriend to Cho. Or that they, at least, had a relationship.
There were other stories printed elsewhere which went beyond, accusing her of leading him on or of cheating on him. That loose end was tied up and we went on to the next of how many more disturbing facts — leaving Emily to linger too long in the filth of an unlikely association.
Even yesterday, an overseas online headline read: “Gunman’s Love Spat Sparked Massacre.”
Sickening enough that a madman killed her. Now add the slur she was involved with him romantically.
How the ghost of Cho — who took pictures of girls secretly and would not say hello to them but stalked them via the Internet — must have grinned at that link.
Police said yesterday they were still trying to find a connection between Emily and the twisted character who liked to be known as “question mark.” But it seems clear now her world, or any of the important elements in it, didn’t likely include Cho.
She was light, happy and loved to ride in the country with her mother — whom she called almost every day.
He was dark and angry — worrying his own parents he was suicidal.
Tommy Pendleton, a friend of Emily’s, pointed out in an online posting: “Emily Hilscher is not related to the shooter in any way regarding a serious relationship.”
While the probable lack of any relationship has been amended and clarified deep inside news copy which has flowed out of here, I feel guilt that I had any part in drawing her into an embrace with a killer.
What seems beyond question is that Emily Hilscher didn’t deserve to appear in the same sentence as vile Cho Seung-Hui, let alone maligned by the allegation he held a place in her heart.
The emphasis, of course, is mine. I apologize, Mister Burnett, if I am not adequately able to state my feelings at having found a journalist demonstrating such integrity. It is an experience to which I am most unaccustomed.
But it is most welcome. For that sir, I thank you.