Internet Message Board "Death" Is this a good story?

Well, I thought the lead was absolutely right. It was the whole reason to do the story. We all know of ridiculous and abominable behavior on message boards but someone who would fake their own death to the point of buying a newspaper obit? That's something I had never heard of before. But I thought the article should have gone more big picture: maybe find some other examples of this kind of behavior instead of just focusing on the Springsteen board. Also, maybe contact a mental health professional to get their take.

Most importantly, I thought it was completely unnnecessary to give the description of Oren's appearance. That seemed a bit over the top, especially the part about the lazy eye.

Interestingly, the reaction of the Springsteen message board seems to be kill the messenger. First, they were going after the reporter and the paper but once they found out someone from the message board was the one who tipped the paper, they are now going after that person and saying what they did was far worse than the dude who faked his death and bought an obit.

As usual, the media is at fault and if the media isn't at fault, it's the whistle-blower. This is a fascinating phenomenon to me. As I've always been a member of the media my entire adult life I can't even comprehend it. Hardly anyone ever appreciates the media and most only seeks to criticize it at every turn.

 

I thought it was an interesting story. Might have been better to broaden it up high.

Some of the best stories the New York Times does aren't hard news or investigations but quirky things like this so it's good to take chances.

 

The only problem with trying to broaden the story is that it then starts to become a dreaded trend piece, which are the most mocked stories in journalism right now.

 

There's a difference between giving context and turning it into a trend story. Internet suicides/deaths/car accidents/miscellaneous dramas aren't unprecedented, and it doesn't hurt to sell the reader on the idea that this is more common than they might imagine, especially if they're message board posters themselves

Now, when you say trend pieces are "the most mocked stories in journalism" right now, who's doing the mocking? Readers? Or fellow reporters? Because if it's latter, no offense, I don't give a shit about them. If I ever get a real job again, it's probably not going to be for a publication that caters to journalists. If it's something that my customers might be interested in, I'm going to run it, even if my brothers and sisters snicker at me for it. You guys aren't paying my freight.

I WILL say this: As subcultures go, I'd rather read about message board drama than furries.

 

There seem to be two aspects to the story, neither of which was delved into strongly enough with more examples:

1) Why someone feels the need to fake his own death, going as far as buying an obit in a newspaper, to draw attention to himself
and
2) How an internet message board can become such a huge part of people's lives that they develop deep emotional attachments to the people who post without ever meeting them in person. The level of emotional fighting going on over there on this issue is ridiculous.

For the record 1: I used to be a regular poster on that Springsteen board. Then, about 4-5 years ago, the board had a major crash and everyone had to re-register and things started again from scratch. At that point, a flood of new people came aboard and the character of the board changed for the worse and I stopped frequenting it as much. In addition, I also got a real life as I got married around that time and I had less time for reading internet message boards. I'll still lurk there and post an occasional comment, but nothing with the regularity I used to post with.
For the record 2: I recognize the name of the poster who faked his death, but missed all the threads about his "death" at the time it happened. It is only now with all the debate on the article that I'm learning about what happened and am glad I missed it the first time around.

 

Just, FYI. I have a headache. Could be an aneurysm. Make sure my obit runs in the Plain Dealer.

 

Let poindexter know.

 

I can't. He's dead to me.

 

Yeah, the lazy eye stuff bothered me, too. "Hey, this guy's a liar. And you can tell because he can't look you in the eye unless he manipulates his lazy eye!"

I'm a little baffled by the reactions on the Springsteen board, though. You're probably right. People just look for ways to lash out at the media. I read some of the comments following the story and several were pretty vicious toward the Backstreets posters.

This online community stuff is great, isn't it?

 

For me, the story became too complicated and with too many characters. (Admittedly, this may be because I'm a simpleton who can't follow TV cop drama plots without DVR to pause, rewind and replay.)

 

This was my feeling as well -- two good story lines here, but both were just kind of skimmed over. Didn't come away knowing why the guy did it, or quite understanding why people were so invested in it, when they noted he was a notorious liar and more.

 

Hey, the guy bought an obit in the newspaper. That's a good thing.
Do you know how ridiculously expensive those are? Print media isn't dead!!! He can only claim legitimacy by putting it in the paper!!!!