On Oct. 1, newsstands were filled with the story of a massive school shooting, subjecting America’s hearts to yet another tragedy.

In the wake of the Umpqua Community College Shooting, the Douglas County sheriff took a stand against encouraging future shooters by refusing to release the name of the shooter.

In doing so, Sheriff John Hanlin is making strides to prevent mass shootings.

It seems as if this merry-go-round has been spinning faster recently, yet we are doing little to stop the regularity of heavily promoting shooters.

NBC news reported on the interview which took place with Hanlin shortly after the shooting, during which he proclaimed, “You will never hear us mention his name … he in no way deserves it.”

On April 16, 2007, a gunman on Virginia Tech’s campus ended his struggle with mental illness, taking 32 of his peers with him.

The aftermath focused largely around mental health problems and revolved around the gunman.

Additionally, on Dec. 14, 2012, 27 individuals were killed by a lone gunman in Newtown, Connecticut. Upon the release of his name, his face was plastered in every major newspaper in the country.

In many senses of the word, these young men became celebrities and household names all over the United States.

The Daily Mail shed light on last Thursday’s shooter’s motives, stating “In August he praised [the] TV station shooter … and said killing more people meant ‘more limelight.’”

Since Sheriff Hanlin’s refusal to name the gunman, multiple news sources have published his name anyway, seeing it as the public’s right to know.

This is exactly what the shooter wanted and should not have happened.

“[These] mass shootings, anyone who is initiating that kind of violence obviously has some purpose, it’s not random,” said Bimbisar Irom, a media ethics professor at WSU. “It’s a perverse way of getting their name out there and remembered.”

It seems more and more these shooters are driven by the need for recognition.

Perhaps they are seeking recognition which they never received from anyone in their lifetime. Perhaps they feel as if they need to prove themselves in a manner that demands to be heard.

There is certainly a preconception and a motive behind the actions of these shooters.

Irom also commented on the media’s response to such stories.

“Media has [a] responsibility to larger society to report the news as it is … for the social good,” he said.

Where the line is drawn around “for the social good” then becomes the dilemma.

Hanlin sees that refusing to name the gunman provides a social good.Although the public deserves the truth, what happens in response to the public being fully informed is a glorification of those who should not be glorified.

Ideas are widespread on how to stop such events from occurring, and the first step to preventing these events is to stop the glorification.

Keep the public safe by not giving criminals what they seek. It’s not the end-all to mass shootings, but it’s a very large step in the right direction.

Philip Grossenbacher is a sophomore english education major from Lynnwood. He can be contacted at 335-2290 or by [email protected]. The opinions expressed in this Column are not necessarily those of the staff of The Daily Evergreen or those of The Office of Student Media.