my question, of course, is more technical - is this case worth a 10 part series in one of the nation's great newspapers? It was an interesting case in many ways, and certainly became a brief pop culture phenomenon, but really is it worth sending the Post's talented crew of reporters and editors off on such a massive project, particularly in a city where dozens of murder cases remain unclosed every year? I don't see new leads or new developments here. I don't think the story illustrates any great truths or makes any new and transcendent points about culture, political power or even shoddy police work in D.C., which, as a former longtime resident I can testify is old and unsurprising news.
It depends on how you look at the newspaper. If you look at it as a source of legitimate news that should rank items in order of importance and then match that up with the page number it falls on, then maybe this isn't an important story.
If you look at it as a business that is actually trying to earn money to pay its reporters during tough economic times with fierce competition from online news sources, then it becomes a different issue. Because it's interesting.
The AJC recently did a multi-part series on eugenics. Was there anything new or newsworthy to report? Uh, no. But it was a fascinating article, most importantly from the perspective of our initial reaction by today's standards (horror) and then walking back through how society came to view it as acceptable. The writer did a terrific job of making you squirm a little and see how a judge or social worker might have really believed they were doing a good thing. And yet...it's wrong...isn't it???
In the same way, although I haven't read the Chandra Levy article, they might be trying to look back at this case with an eye on how events in the news can make or break a murder case. But for 9/11, this case might have been solved. And some conspiracy theorists might even suggest, had someone more important than that
Condit been involved, that it was a coverup to divert our attention from Chandra's death. Ever see
Wag the Dog?
IOW, there's a bigger picture than just Chandra Levy. It's the age old question of what is news. Why do some missing people get splashed across the front page and others are never mentioned? Sure race and sex are factors, but plenty of pretty blonde girls never get that kind of coverage either. So what causes us to latch onto certain cases and skim over others?
Which I guess is what you were asking to begin with. Since we're still talking about it, I suppose this qualifies.
