>>>This story somehow smacks of runaway bride syndrome... now let's see which stories are out of the window because space had to be made for this one. Candidates: Lieberman, Iraq, Lebanon, BP, Supreme Court ruling... nothing to see here, move along to the wacko teacher who just confessed for your entertainment.
>>>
>>>I originally made the joke before I was aware that it seemed pretty obvious the guy was a whacko pervert looking for attention.
>>>
>>>However, it came out today that he apparently knew some specific details about the murder scene that had not been released to the public. Those are details that he likely couldn't have guessed at. It may just be that he was extremely resourceful at researching - but I guess we'll learn more in coming days and weeks.
>>
>>I'm not in any way interested in knowing whether he did it or not. I'm not buying it that this story is so important to merit such a coverage. It's smoke and mirrors to hide something else that's really important. Whenever I see runaway bride type of story I try to see what's in the magician's other hand.
>>
>>Off the top of my head, a brief list: story of the Cuban kid (Elian?) who was to be returned to his father; the runaway bride herself, Michael Jackson in court, Terry Schiavo case, Peterson murder, the girl missing on a vacation in some French colony, and now this. They all took a lot of space in the news for weeks, while the more important things went un(der)reported.
>
>
>You are debating against human nature. You seem to be an exception, and good for you, but most people are more interested in reading about people than public policy. Crime stories have always been popular (hence the news business maxim, "If it bleeds, it leads"). Quirky stories like the runaway bride and "man bites dog" stories have always been popular. There is nothing new here, so I do not share your suspicion of some massive conspiracy to distract us from the "really important" stuff. Most readers and viewers of the news wouldn't be following those stories anyway. Does this make us ideal citizens? Of course not. But it is human nature.

The "if it bleeds, it leads" maxim has been changed into 'if it bleeds, it saturates', and that's the difference. Leading (banner headline, first item on broadcast) is way way different than all else is shunted aside in favour of the man bites dog story for 5 days straight.
Yes, human nature enjoys odd news items. Always has and always will. But using that as the excuse for turning it into 24/7 coverage for 5+ days is not in the same league.
There are many other factors at play here but the primary one is CONTROL of the news. These fluff items demand far less control and thus greatly reduced jeopardy that the "news" organization will offend those on whom it depends.