The Morning Meeting with Al Tompkins is a daily Poynter briefing of story ideas worth considering and more timely context for journalists, written by senior faculty Al Tompkins. Sign up here to have it delivered to your inbox every weekday morning.

I praise the Nashville Police Department for quickly releasing the police body and security camera videos from the school shooting where a person with two assault rifles murdered six people. The videos will be useful, even essential, to police training.

But I cannot justify using the unedited videos in news coverage. And I certainly do not endorse journalists posting those videos online “just because we can.”

Many years ago, my Poynter colleague, ethicist Bob Steele, taught us to consider the tone of our coverage and the degree of disturbing imagery and descriptions we use.

Are we showing graphic images to alarm our audiences? Do the images inform and enlighten us in a way that descriptions cannot? How much of the video would we be able to justify using to make our point?

The police body camera video is useful to a point in showing the exceptional courage and professional skill that it takes to rush into a building where officers knew with a high degree of certainty that they might face gunfire. The video shows there is not a moment of delay as the officer racks a round into the rifle chamber, rushes with colleagues to clear room after room and then fires the fatal rounds. I can imagine the ethical airing and posting of some of that video to demonstrate the officers’ courage and professionalism.

But I cannot find a reason to show the security video of the killer firing rounds into the school’s entry doors and stalking the hallways looking for victims. It is pure sensationalism that does not illuminate any issue in question about what occurred.

The one possible section of that video that could be useful is the shooter’s entry into the school, to show how easily a rifle round blasts through a glass door and allows unfettered access. It is a legitimate security question worthy of exploration. But I also wonder whether showing that video instructs other shooters how to accomplish their destructive goals.

You might ask, “Didn’t we air the hallway video from Uvalde?” Yes, and there was a reason to do so. The security camera video showed the slow police response despite police claims that they responded quickly and forcefully.

I am not saying that disturbing and even graphic video has no place in our news coverage. But we should place a high bar on its use.

• There should be a compelling reason to show such video. For example, if the video shows a narrative counter to the official version of what occurred.
• When journalists use graphic images in their reporting it should be part of a serious contextual exploration of the event, not just to get social media traffic or to have something sensational to tease at the top of a TV program.
• Remember, you have a journalistic responsibility to consider whether and how to use such graphic images every time you use them or choose not to use them. If there was a reason to use them the day after the killings, it does not justify their continued use a week later. And conversely, when you avoid using those images immediately after the shooting it does not preclude the possible use that the images can illuminate when new questions arise.

Not everyone agrees with my view, which is why we should have open and honest discussions in our newsrooms about such things. Here are a few of the responses I got from journalists who said showing the video forces viewers to confront the awfulness of the loss:

(Screenshot/Twitter)

(Screenshot/Twitter)

(Screenshot/Twitter)

Mass shooters sometimes seek a moment of infamy. Don’t reward or instruct murderous behavior. Simultaneously, don’t shrink from showing disturbing scenes when you can justify why you are using them.

The devastating power of the AR-15

The saddest part about the timing around The Washington Post’s publication of its special report about the history and allure of the AR-15 rifle is that the Post could have published it nearly any week and still been adjacent to a mass shooting in America involving an assault rifle.

The Post chose to use graphic, even disturbing animations to show the devastating power of an AR-15 round. Back to my thoughts on when and how to use graphic video, this is an example of the justified use of such imagery. It shows something that cannot be fully described with as much clarity as the images provide. And, as the Post said in its prelude to the visualizations, maybe we have sanitized the devastation that doctors witness when an AR-15 victim arrives at the emergency room. The Post reports:

The AR-15 fires bullets at such a high velocity — often in a barrage of 30 or even 100 in rapid succession — that it can eviscerate multiple people in seconds. A single bullet lands with a shock wave intense enough to blow apart a skull and demolish vital organs. The impact is even more acute on the compact body of a small child.

“It literally can pulverize bones, it can shatter your liver and it can provide this blast effect,” said Joseph Sakran, a gunshot survivor who advocates for gun violence prevention and a trauma surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

During surgery on people shot with high-velocity rounds, he said, body tissue “literally just crumbled into your hands.”

The carnage is rarely visible to the public. Crime scene photos are considered too gruesome to publish and often kept confidential. News accounts rely on antiseptic descriptions from law enforcement officials and medical examiners who, in some cases, have said remains were so unrecognizable that they could be identified only through DNA samples.

As Sakran put it: “We often sanitize what is happening.”

The Post explains that its animations show two rounds, one from an AR-15 and the other from a handgun. The animation applies that understanding to “the entrance and exit wounds of two actual victims — Noah Pozner, 6, and Peter Wang, 15 — killed in school shootings when they were struck by multiple bullets. This account is based on a review of nearly 100 autopsy reports from several AR-15 shootings as well as court testimony and interviews with trauma surgeons, ballistics experts and a medical examiner.”

The Post explains the precautions it took while producing those animations based on actual gun deaths. This is the kind of disclosure I spoke about above. Explain why this graphic imagery is necessary to the reporting:

The Post determined that there is a public interest in demonstrating the uniquely destructive power of the AR-15 when used to kill.

What follows is a detailed depiction showing the impact of bullets fired from AR-15s at two young victims. It is based on autopsy reports for Noah Pozner and Peter Wang that The Post obtained through public records.

Due to the unusual visual nature of the presentation, The Post took the added step of seeking — and receiving — the consent of the victims’ families before proceeding with this account. The Post offered the families the opportunity to view the depictions in advance of publication, which they declined to do.

The families also declined to be interviewed for this story, but a spokesperson for the Wang family offered a statement explaining why Peter’s parents, Hui and Kong Wang, provided their consent to The Post.

“Peter’s parents want people to know the truth,” said Lin Chen, their niece and Peter’s cousin. “They want people to know about Peter. They want people to remember him.”

This presentation may be disturbing to some people.

As you explore the Post’s reporting, and I hope you do, keep in mind there were no injured victims in the Nashville school shooting. Only deaths.

Nashville media were exceptional

I was a TV reporter and news director in Nashville for a decade and a half so excuse a little home team cheering, but the news coverage of the Nashville school shooting was exceptionally well reported.

I watched dear friends of mine on WTVF, WKRN, WSMV and WZTV showing compassion and restraint even while pressing for answers and providing information to a frantic public. Nashville is a media market where many reporters, photojournalists, anchors and managers have been in the market for decades. On Monday, that maturity showed.

I watched as reporters like Ben Hall showed that they seemed to know every street and school. They know people who worked in the school and they had friends whose children attended that school. Journalists like Holly Thompson and Vicki Yates showed real emotion and empathy while remaining professional.

What I saw reminded me of the great value of having experienced journalists who have long tenure in a market, who know the community and the sensibilities, who have worked on the streets and have seen some things but do not feel a need to make a moment of tragedy about themselves.

Thank you, journalists. Even as you help your community heal, you will need to do some healing, too.

Why the rush to sell California mansions before next week?

Starting April 1, Los Angeles will tack a mansion tax on estates that sell for more than $5 million. Los Angeles voters passed the tax with the proceeds going to help build affordable housing.

This affects about 4% of the homes sold in the city and does not affect Beverly Hills, which is its own incorporated city. Sellers have cut prices of some mansions to get them sold before the new tax kicks in. The seller pays the tax. Here are the details:

• Sellers will pay a 4% city tax on transactions over $5 million but under $10 million.
• Homes that go for $10 million or more will be taxed at 5.5%.
• The city expects the measure to raise $672 million for its housing programs.

City officials estimate the tax will bring in more than $600 million. The New York Times says:

Some top agents are offering jaw-dropping deals to help their sellers close property transactions before the tax goes into effect. Jade Mills, a luxury broker for Coldwell Banker in Beverly Hills, and Josh Altman, a luxury broker with Douglas Elliman and a regular presence on Bravo’s “Million Dollar Listing,” are offering any agent a $1 million bonus if they can bring in a buyer by April 1 for a seven-bedroom Bel Air estate priced at nearly $28 million.

“It’s created a bit of a frenzy, with people trying to beat the April 1 date, and lots of opportunities for buyers looking for value,” said Tyrone McKillen, a broker with the luxury agency Official. Mr. McKillen said he has seen a huge spike in buyers looking to close by March 31 and using the looming deadline as leverage for offering a lower purchase price.

This move keeps with the broader national themes of taxation that President Joe Biden espouses of making the rich pay more of what he calls “their fair share.”

The end of the Camaro

In January, the last Camaro will roll off the Lansing, Michigan, General Motors assembly line. There will be new versions of some sort later. But this was a generational icon. Camaros are a favorite for movie producers.

The Detroit Free Press reports:

To mark the Camaro’s end of production, GM will release a collector’s edition package on several 2024 Camaro models, including the top-end ZL1. The Collector’s Edition will pay “homage to Camaro, resurfacing ties that date back to the development of the first generation Camaro in the 1960s,” GM said in a news release.

GM is not saying much about the next generation of muscle cars but the company has produced six generations of Camaros and the next one may be electric.

There is a cool story with great potential for sound and visuals that journalists could explore. It seems like this will be an opportunity for GM to build in some sort of sound effect for an electric Camaro. Without the throaty vroom, there is not much point being cramped into a sports car, is there? There is an aftermarket for modules that mechanics install to make silent electric cars sound like muscle cars. A comparison of the sounds of the fake engine roars to the real thing would make for a particularly good radio story. The fake roars come booming through your sound system while not bothering the public outside your vehicular bubble.

By the way, the Camaro was almost called the Panther. GM also considered “Chaparral.” SpringdaleChevy.com notes:

The name “Camaro” was probably made up: Chevy has a long history of starting vehicle names with the letter “C” to create alliteration with “Chevrolet,” including vehicles like the Corvette, Cavalier, Cheyenne, Chevelle, Chevette, and many others. Once the “Panther” name was dropped, Chevrolet scrambled for a new name and came up with “Camaro,” which Pete Estes claimed was obscure French slang for “pal, friend or comrade.” After automotive journalists could find no historic basis for the name, Estes famously quipped that the real definition of Camaro is a “vicious animal that eats Mustangs.”

I have always been fascinated with car names. Toyota dealers explain, “Toyota’s vehicle names often come from references to crowns, architecture, royalty, mythology and natural patterns. The Corolla is named after the outer crowning portion of a flower; the Toyota Camry’s name is a play on kan-muri, the Japanese word for ‘Crown’; and the Sequoia is named after the Sequoia tree.”

BMW has a method to its naming madness. In Dodge’s world, Ram seems like a good name for a pickup truck but sometimes things go badly. And think, for example, about whether you would drive the “Toyota Brat, Mazda Bongo Friendee, Daihatsu Naked, AMC Gremlin” or the ill-named Studebaker Dictator, which changed its name after 1937 when it was not cool to be selling things named “dictator.”