International Law

Today's front page of Brisbane's The Courier Mail screamed FACEBOOK MURDER.  This was the part of the story that made the rest of the front page:

WHAT started as a Facebook message from a former boyfriend has ended in the gruesome murder of Sarah Elston, a talented young Brisbane artist.

'West End artist Sarah, 22, was looking forward to catching up with her former flame who contacted her on the popular social networking website. But in a crime that shocked her family and friends the free-spirited artist was found dead in her unit on Tuesday night with multiple injuries.

Neighbours heard screams during the night but did not investigate because of frequent disturbances in the street.

Friends revealed how Sarah, 22, was "happy and excited" about seeing her former boyfriend again after he got in touch with her on the internet.

"She hadn't seen him in a long time but then he contacted her via Facebook," friend Danae Walker said.

Ms Walker, who last saw Sarah only hours before her death, described her as the sort of person who would always give someone a second chance. 

"She could always find something positive in everyone," she said.

You can read the rest of the report here.  What I find appalling about this headline - and to a lesser degree the article - is that it makes Facebook out to be in some culpable in Sarah Elston's death.  When in fact the former boyfriend could have contacted her in any number of ways.  If it was by phone, would the headline be "Telephone Murder"?  Or if it was by email, would it be "Email Murder"?  Fax, letter, postcard?  Well, you get my point.  It sends the wrong message about Facebook entirely as it demonises it as it suggests Facebook was somehow responsible for this tragedy.  The only thing this really says about Facebook is that it is a new way of communicating between friends.  That hardly makes Facebook a murderer.