This past summer I wrote a story for ABCNews.com. I wrote the story, titled “How Old is Too Old to Rock and Roll?,” because the Beach Boys were scheduled to perform on GMA as part of their summer concert series. Apparently the photo that someone picked was a photo of the Beach Boys performing for the Today shows summer concert series. I never noticed it and apparently no one did until now when it was posted on Media Bistro. I guess it’s a good thing that my story is getting more exposure, but what a cheap shot…now, almost a year later.

In the 2004 presidential election I did not watch many of the debates. I had no need to. The day after the debate I would watch the 24 hour news networks and would see all the highlights with a chance to absorb them in and hear commentary from various pundits on TV. It was great.

The problem is for me it’s not 2004 any more. I have for the most part stopped watching TV news (shhh don’t tell anyone). Instead I read newspaper and TV websites and more often then not I get my commentary and additional insight from blogs. So I was under the assumption that the day after this recent debate I would see video clips galore online and in blogs. Not the case. Why? Because as Jeff Jarvis pointed out MSNBC “is acting like the bratty and unpopular rich kid who takes him marbles and harumphs home, ruining the game for everyone.”

MSNBC’s antiquated policies on the usage of debate video have left me feeling completely clueless. Now I surely can read about the debate online, but it just isn’t the same as seeing the clips. So please MSNBC stop ruining the game for everyone.

There has been ample discussion as to the showing of the Virginia Tech killer’s “multimedia manifesto.” Those who appose it being shown say, “I just hate that a lot of people not used to seeing that type of image had to see it.“ That’s a quote from Virginia State Police Col. Steve Flaherty. Those who are in favor of the manifesto being shown claim the obligation of journalists. “When they have news value, we have an obligation to show them,” ABC News Senior VP Jeffrey Schneider said.

With that said, it seems we can make everyone happy. Had the networks just put the video online, they can fulfill their obligation and not offend or disturb those who do not wish to see the video over and over again. Was this ever a thought? If so what are the reasons for not doing this?

I do have one pending question NBC continues to contend that they had a journalistic obligation to show the video and to make it available to the public. That I agree with. How then can they turn around and say, there are parts that are so horrific that they “will never see the light of day?” You comments are welcome on this.

Jeff Jarvis’ take.