Evoking emotion -- that's all that reporting seems to be about anymore. Reporters want a dramatic story. Something with tears, anger, some yelling and screaming. If they have somebody crying on screen, then actual news becomes secondary. But then, while their interviewee is breaking down, they'll ask emotionally loaded questions. They want to know how the victim felt at the time, how they feel now, how they're coping. So it's a reporter's duty to ask somebody who has just stared death in the face to tell us how they feel? I know how I think I'd feel, and it involves a lot of transferred rage and a lot of unprintable words toward a specific reporter. How about, for once, just letting victims properly grieve rather than parade them in front of cameras? Sure, a grizzled police veteran isn't likely to break down on screen, but he can also give you the actual news. Some of us just want the news and wish the media would leave the innocent victims in peace. Regardless, deepest sympathies to the many affected by Monday.