Several readers in the past few days have been upset that the print edition of The Star hasn't run much about Abdulhakim Muhammad, who pleaded not guilty Tuesday in the fatal shooting of Pvt. William Long outside an Army-Navy Career Center in Little Rock, Ark. It was No. 3 in Tuesday's "Today's Top 5" on Page A-2, but that's been it so far.
"You've given all this space to Scott Roeder and (the killing of) George Tiller," said one, "but nothing about this shooting in Arkansas, which is terrorism."
I understand the reasoning here, and it's perfectly fair to say the paper has underplayed the Little Rock shooting. That's a subjective call. But I also think one can make the case that a murder in another state isn't particularly news in Kansas City. As The Star's editor Mike Fannin wrote recently in a Page A-1 column, the paper's focus has turned more to stories with a direct effect on the Kansas City area, Missouri and Kansas. Most printed regional newspapers are heading that direction, as people have plenty of other sources for national and international news in the 21st century.
I think there is a defensible parallel in that both killings have suspects who seem to have acted alone to make a public statement, with motivations based on their personal religious and moral beliefs.
On the other hand, there's a huge difference that I find undeniable. George Tiller was known internationally as one of a very small number of doctors who performed late-term abortions in this country, and in the state of Kansas on top of that.
I'd agree that both acts were meant to send a message, and yes, The Star's giving far more attention to Roeder's than Muhammad's. And if it turns out Muhammad is part of a larger network, it's a totally different story.
Bottom line: I think Roeder is much bigger news in KC than the Little Rock shootings -- but I think it's reasonable to say Muhammed was underplayed in general.
