Readers React: How much is too much coverage of the San Bernardino attack?

To the editor: I disagree with readers who’ve written that The Times has overdone the coverage of the San Bernardino shootings. (“Enough with the wall-to-wall San Bernardino coverage, readers say,” Readers React, Dec. 19)

I am a retired college educator; I’ve worked with and taught many Muslims in my career at UCLA, USC, Cal State San Bernardino (coincidence) and the University of Washington. All were just like everyone else I worked with.

The Times has gone into great detail about how the radical extremists planned their horror, how they exploited the Internet toward this end, and how they carefully kept their plans secret from those around them. Such radical extremists are the enemy. The vast majority of Muslims are not.

It is essential that we learn how to identify the enemy. The Times’ articles on the shooters have provided a useful resource toward this end.

Richard Goodman, Camarillo

..

To the editor: I was very happy to see your Mailbag regarding coverage of the San Bernardino shooters, which noted that “readers have expressed dismay over what they feel is aggrandizingly prominent coverage of the perpetrators.”

I then opened the two-page spread in the California section of this same daily edition and found the “timeline of the shooters’ radicalization,” a step-by-step, how-to process to become radicalized, as those shooters did.

Not only is The Times apparently not listening to readers; it has also given would-be terrorists instructions on how to do what they will.

Jo Anne Slater, Monrovia

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook