I’ve already had two calls from reporters today asking about the impact of cellphones, blogging, wikis, etc. on the shooting and the events surrounding it. After supplying the real answer, which elicits a “yeah but” from the reporter, I supply what I imagine are the usual answers for someone in my position, with whatever critical spin is possible. My real answer goes something like this:
The most important technology to consider in assessing what happened yesterday was the gun. Everything else pales in comparison.
Fwiw, I think I’d insist on sticking with your real answer. No matter how many “yeah, but” replies you get.
I’m in agreement with Gil. I’ve already had colleagues here make mention of Bowling for Columbine and, fwiw, they generally agree that the film paints a too rosy portrait of Canada. What surprised me is that so many knew nothing about what happened at UdeM (I had to explain to an Australian colleague why they wear white ribbons on December 6th, and not some other day). And they certainly don’t know about Valerie Fabricant.
I have been watching from afar, though, through blogs and flickr, all of which make me feel strangely voyeuristic.
What’s your real answer?