Matthew Shepard's Media Framing: Who's to blame?

Matthew Shepard’s story has an interesting take on media framing. It is easy to see the power of the media and the way it is able to “frame” the story. I found that the naming of the event was what stuck out to me. I thought it was interesting that most of the titles from the media included the words “gay man” beaten to death. However, the gender of those who beat him was not mentioned. I think that this can be summed up best by looking at what the media gives the public. The public was interested in the support of Matthew Shepard but not in support of gay rights. So, the media framed the story to cater to the audience. I like how the article looked at other events that shapes or caters to the public opinion. The article showed how media frames and helps the public see terrible events like Columbine. I think public opinion plays a huge role in the media’s framing of the story. My question would be “Should we blame the media for framing a story to cater to our opinions? Or “Should we blame ourselves for the opinions that the media frames so that it will parallel public opinion?” The way that this was framed caused Americans to feel guilty yet still feel prejudice and hate. Can we re-frame how the media frame’s a story? What ideologies can be changed to help?  Overall, the article gave some great insights into the way that media is able to frame stories and influence public opinion. It all comes down to is the framing that is done by media our fault or theirs?