Why do social media networks delete shooter's profiles?

I feel like they should remain up since it's apart of history. I think the public has a right to know what they were posting online prior to going on a murderous spree. In some cases, I can understand like most recently with Cruz. He had very disturbing images that very clearly broke Instagram's guidelines regardless of whether or not he went on a killing spree. But Randy's channel? William's? These act as archives to let us know who they were beforehand and are really all we have to go by for the people who are interested in learning more about the killer other than what the media*cough*lies*cough* tells us about them. Do you think they should delete their profiles after the fact? Why do you think they do it? Are there any killers in particular you feel have gotten an unfair treatment of their e-footprint?

pess1mist wrote:

Are there any killers in particular you feel have gotten an unfair treatment of their e-footprint?

I'm not happy at all that Bill's Mediafire account was taken down. That account could've had a wealth of information and since nobody archived it it's now wiped from history.

They're completely right to delete them so that they're not kept public. I think there is a lot to be learned by studying these archives but you have to balance that against people with murder-suicide ideation being galvanised by them to commit similar atrocities.

I remember [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (Randy Stair) making the same point.  

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Seems to me, the people that the deletion of material would irk the most is the perpetrators themselves who are motivated by infamy.

I can see both sides to this as well.

I understand why some accounts are wiped clean, but at the same time it irritates me. I think they are possibly deleting valuable info that may help others understand how someone could do these types of things.

Well, I think first of all it's because of friends/contacts on those social media pages. Some of the people can write very bizarre things to friends or anyone who ever commented on shooter's page. Also, it's always a huge wave of negativity and hate in aftermath, so social networks try to distance themselves from heavy impact. And of course to prevent the emergence of followers, copycats and fans.

Elliot Rodger's channel still exists for example.

Jea wrote:

Well, I think first of all it's because of friends/contacts on those social media pages. Some of the people can write very bizarre things to friends or anyone who ever commented on shooter's page. Also, it's always a huge wave of negativity and hate in aftermath, so social networks try to distance themselves from heavy impact. And of course to prevent the emergence of followers, copycats and fans.

I can see that as well.

Look at the info that has gotten leaked from Eric and Dylan's friends pages throughout the year.

I think people not even associated with the shooters who were survivors get harassing messages as well.

rabadon55 wrote:

Elliot Rodger's channel still exists for example.

His last video was iced though.

They should at least Achieve ALL of the content before deleting the account for historical purposes and to why they should be deleted [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] comes with a great point that all of the hate comment and possibly the "heavy impact" the social media will take. But it should be required to achieve the shooters content first and then upload it for all to see

And I must agree with Randy Stair, history should be preserved! I love history and even though people don´t like what has happened and it "may" inspire others it´s still history! Think about Bonnie and Clyde or John Dillinger and the North Hollywood shootout their items have all been preserved and so should lets say the basement tapes of Columbine or the evidence from Columbine and other shootings. Think about in 100-200 years or even 500 years from now! They shouldn´t try to censor history just so they can be political correct by not offending anyone by let´s say put the evidence in a museum. That makes me think about there were talk about putting the car used in the bombing by Anders Breivik in a museum but I think it was declined but it should seriously be put in a museum because it´s an important part of history now! People are too concerned about and i quote "not giving the mass shooter what he want" that they are willing to delete a part of history just out of spite. And yes since Anders Breivik is still alive he would probably get a lot of pleasure from knowing his bomb car made it to a museum but again people need to put apart their biased opinions and not destroy evidence out of spite of it might be what the shooter wanted or because they are trying to be PC about the whole ordeal.

Sometimes those pages become like "cult locations" of the shooter like Elliot Rodger.If you look at the comment section there are alot of people who glorify him

QuestionMark wrote:

rabadon55 wrote:

Elliot Rodger's channel still exists for example.

His last video was iced though.

To be fair he was actually threatening to kill people in that video unlike the other videos he made.