We at Spunlogic are deeply saddened by the events that unfolded at Virginia Tech on Monday. Now, days later, we have all had time to reflect on the events that shook our nation, and how new media has changed the landscape of tragedy.

Minutes after the mass murder, my coworkers and I were alerted to the breaking news. One coworker was sent an alert on his PDA, while it was sent to another coworker via RSS. I came across the story after opening a new browser to find the headline on my Yahoo! homepage. As each piece of information was released, we verbally shared the updates along with our distress. Despite the horrific details, we were comforted by the information – with each update, we were less in the dark.

Later in the day, Amy, a fellow Project Manager, received a call of relief from a friend in a student exchange program at Virginia Tech. He was going down his cell phone’s address book letting friends and family know he was not hurt. Amy was surprised to find out that her friend, Martin, had actually been outside the classroom building when the SWAT team arrived. Originally thinking he was witnessing some type of drill, Martin caught the following 15 minutes on film from an adjacent building. His call to Amy was short, but she soon got the full story when he wrote a blog post about his experience. Martin’s video and story would later become international news, even being broadcasted on CNN.

News spread quickly as a result of new and interactive media. Television networks and newspapers scurried to use search engine marketing to secure Google, Yahoo!, and MSN keywords related to the killings. Meanwhile, students and their loved ones traded phone calls, text messages, instant messages, emails, and social networking posts. An “I’m ok at VT” group was established on the social networking site Facebook to allow students to communicate their safety to friends. In turn, the site quickly became a bulletin board for students to find out the whereabouts of their friends. Social networking sites soon became the source for breaking, but unsubstantiated, stories, as well as a resource for reporters looking for details on the victims.

As in most cases, when things are done faster, they typically lose quality. As reported by InfoWorld, bloggers wrote of the presumed identity of the killer, linking to the Facebook profile of a Virginia Tech student who was pictured with an extensive gun collection. Many claimed the student even posted a blog implying he was the shooter. The rumors were, for the most part, silenced when the student made a post claiming he couldn’t be the shooter, as the real shooter committed suicide.  On Wednesday the world became intimately acquainted with the actual killer, Cho Seung-Hui, as NBC News aired video and pictures that Cho mailed to their studios.

Misinformation is not the only negative impact new media will play in this and future adversities. The amount of detailed information (and users’ exposure to it) may prove to be a dangerous byproduct of the times. On Wednesday’s edition of Anderson Cooper 360, Anderson interviewed former FBI profiler, Gregg McCrary, who warned of the potential for copy cats due to the extensive coverage of the tragedy.  McCrary explained that “[his] concern is by repeatedly playing these videos and showing these photos over and over again, we’re energizing some other killer out there, somebody who is on the edge, who is on the verge, and sees this as a way to go. Just as [the Virginia Tech killer] identified with the Columbine shooters, somebody’s going to identify with this guy. [McCrary believes] the responsible thing to do is to back off on showing these videos and these pictures. [The news] can certainly report the story and that needs to be done, but [McCrary believes] the danger here is that we’re energizing some other killer and that we may have some other events that follow in the wake of this.”

Our inquisitive and impatient nature has led to the success of social networking, instant messaging, and other Web 2.0 staples; but what are the costs? Will the camera phone recordings, streaming video diaries, victims’ blogs, etc. help the nation heal, fuel copycats, desensitize America’s youth, or all of the above? In the future, perhaps we will use interactive media, such as SMS, to alert those in danger faster.

For years, America has been at the mercy of media gatekeepers, newspaper editors and television producers, but in the user-generated world, it is our responsibility to self-edit. I am the first person to claim my right to any information available to me, but I also feel I am mature enough to make wise decisions about the content I consume. Nevertheless, in the world where anyone can become an internet celebrity, I can’t help but be concerned that the Virginia Tech killer has laid a path for others seeking his twisted yet endless fame. In the end, I do not bless nor condemn the role new media has played in this horrific event; I only question if the world can change as fast as new media.