Withholding of Columbine tapes might be only prudent, legal way to proceed.

By Gregory Desilet
June 30, 2006

I have spent more than a decade studying the effects of media violence on consumers, and while the subject is difficult to summarize in this forum, I do believe that a significant risk exists in any possible release of the Columbine tapes.

Public interest in the Columbine tapes has always been high. Some parents of the Columbine victims want the tapes released because they believe that the contents, however shocking, will help identify the potential symptoms of destructive aggression in teenagers, raise parental awareness and ultimately contribute to the prevention of similar violence. Moreover, a recent editorial in the Boulder Daily Camera argues that "Copycats won't be stopped by censorship" and goes on to point out that "in a free and open society, there will always be mounds of material that can be—and will be—used as a guide and an inspiration by demented souls."

Others, including the FBI, and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office, want the tapes sequestered because of content they believe will increase the likelihood of copycat violence—content that includes detailed instructions for planning similar violence along with the expression of attitudes of contempt and hatred that would encourage it.

Having been handed final authority by the Colorado Supreme Court, Jefferson County Sheriff Ted Mink announced on Monday, June 19, that he would not release video- and audiotapes made by the Columbine killers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.

There does not appear to be any middle ground. Under the state open-records law, the tapes, if released, must be made available to everyone and must also be available for copying. This situation raises the question: Is sealing the Columbine tapes censorship or healthy regulation?

History shows that filmmakers have taken cues from real-life serial killers (Psycho and Silence of the Lambs) while other real-life assailants have taken cues from films (Pittsburgh teen killer Michale Anderson, for example, from A Clockwork Orange, and would-be presidential assassin John Hinckley Jr. from Taxi Driver).

A creative and—some might say—perverse filmmaker could take a cue from the Columbine tragedy and make a film based on events surrounding it, including the "basement tapes," and thereby largely defeat Mink's intentions. Such a film could perhaps inspire copycat violence in a way similar to what has been claimed for the "basement tapes."

Is there any point in attempting to control criminal-justice materials in a "free and open society"—especially when these records often provide the basis for various media productions?

In a free and open society the principle of censorship, in the abstract, is abhorrent. But the social realities are clear.

Everything, including speech that poses a potential danger to members of an unevenly informed, unevenly stable, and sometimes unassuming public ought to be submitted to some degree of scrutiny and potential regulation. Under certain circumstances the effects some products have on consumers, even where involving perhaps only a small minority, can be fairly certain and sufficiently deadly to warrant regulation.

Mink was informed by the FBI that the Columbine tapes could, with a high degree of certainty, produce extremely violent copycat effects among a small minority of a general population. Due in large measure to this information, he made the decision to prevent the tapes from reaching the publicsquare. Given current law, this appears to be the only form of regulation available.

That this decision resembles censorship should not incline us to confuse this action with censorship. As a society, we need to take a hard look at the difference between censorship and forms of regulation and be flexible enough to at least include media in the discussion of regulation—even if that immerses us in a complex and difficult discussion.

Gregory Desilet (www.gregorydesilet. com) is a Longmont author. His recent book, Our Faith in Evil, explores the effects of entertainment violence. He will be available for a discussion and book signing at the Boulder Borders Bookstore on July 8 at 2 p.m.

Click on the following link to preview works on Media Violence

Copyright © Gregory Desilet 2005
All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Digital photography and website designed by WebNet Solutions