Anderson Cooper seems like a great guy and has the chops to be an excellent journalist, but he also has a hero complex that sometimes gets in the way of his work. In his telecast following the horrific Aurora tragedy, Cooper made a point to say that he didn’t want to say the name of the shooter and would spend as little time as possible on him so as not to glorify him. It was grandstanding nonsense.

Does that suggest that other journalists who’ve examined the killer’s past and motives are somehow misbehaving? Can’t facts be gathered and disseminated without the glorification of a murderer? Of course they can.

The only way to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable is by seeking truth. I do want to hear the name of the killer, as unpleasant as it will sound. I want to know his story. I want to know about his family. Did he develop schizophrenia as he entered his twenties? Was this a crime beyond motive by someone who was too disturbed for reason? Were there indications of his deteriorating state at his university, perhaps some record his behavior? Are there adequate resources for families and educators to get help for such a person? If so, what went wrong? Where did the system fail?

If some people are annoyed by attention being focused on someone who perpetrated such a horrible crime, so be it. That kind of enlightenment may help us avoid similar tragedies in the future. The role of the journalist isn’t to soothe people in a time of crisis or tragedy; that’s something to be accomplished by family, friends, clergy, civic leaders and mental-health professionals. Journalists should always be decent but not necessarily popular.•