News Media Just Won't Say # Of Dead

[SoCalMusicLover]

Right on top of the story as usual. You have to go online to find out what's going on. CNN & MSNBC are content with "Multiple Dead," rather than the true figure which is almost THIRTY.

[MFM008]

1. My news alert

Said 27.

[cwydro]

4. Thats what BBC is saying.

But I’ve got no problem with the media holding off until they know for sure.

[Trust Buster]

2. That is the responsible play. No need to rush forth with an unconfirmed number.

[Iliyah]

3. Almost 30

[Takket]

5. CNN live report said 27

[RKP5637]

6. Yep. NYT saying "More Than 20 Dead."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/05/us/church-shooting-texas.html

BBC, "At least 27 people have died."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41880511

So damn sad and pathetic.

[Cattledog]

7. They won't say because they don't know.

If they say 27 dead and it turns out to be 17 that's another bullet point for the right to smear the media.

[SoCalMusicLover]

8. They Know

If there's talk that it's 27, you can bet it's that or likely more.

It's like they're trying to hide the reality by putting up "multiple fatalities." It's WELL Over 20 Dead, and they could provide that information.

[Sneederbunk]

9. Where is the urgency?

[appleannie1943]

10. CNN said 27 earlier then went back to multiple.

[Codeine]

11. I'm not sure why they can't hold off

until they're certain. Is there a pressing urgency for a specific number?

[appleannie1943]

12. They are also saying they don't know but think the shooter is probably a local that

is familiar with that church. Sometimes I think they say things just to hear themselves talk.

[exboyfil]

13. There is a name out there from multiple sources

and that he killed his family first.

[mainstreetonce]

14. I heard the opposite on MSNBC

From outside the area

[uppityperson]

15. Patience is needed. What's the urgency in knowing? I'd rather wait for accurate #.

It just happened, there's no need for us to know immediately.