If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Graphic images in the news
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I wondered what you all think of graphic images of dead and injured people in the news, on TV news and in newspapers?
I think in a way it is important to show the reality of things that happen so people realise the truth of what goes on, especially in war situations. But in another way it could be seen as insenstive to the people involved, or unnecessary if children are watching. Maybe there should be a watershed on news showing graphic images?
I've found some of the things I've seen on the news in the last few days upsetting, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I would rather know what was going on than get a sanitised version. What do you think? When the bombings happened in London last year did they show dead bodies? (I can't remember)
I think in a way it is important to show the reality of things that happen so people realise the truth of what goes on, especially in war situations. But in another way it could be seen as insenstive to the people involved, or unnecessary if children are watching. Maybe there should be a watershed on news showing graphic images?
I've found some of the things I've seen on the news in the last few days upsetting, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I would rather know what was going on than get a sanitised version. What do you think? When the bombings happened in London last year did they show dead bodies? (I can't remember)
0
Comments
So yes, they should show the reality of things, graphic or not. If they don't it's easier for people to become deluded and not understand how bad things really are.
It's an interesting argument. Let me put this to everyone. Should the hostages being beheaded be shown on television? How about those scenes a while back of two soldiers bodies being dragged through the streets in Iraq, and then strung up? There's always the argument with TV news that it's put directly into someone's living room, so there's not much chance of them being able to decide whether it's something they want to watch until they've already seen it. In films or documentaries, you can get away with showing these sorts of things, because people have to make a conscious effort to go and see it.
They can give warnings before showing such images to the public on television which would give them the choice. It's their problem if they watch it and don't like it.
I see no problem and like previous answers, it shows the reality and concequences of things.
That is indeed correct. I'm not that bothered by the images and think that they should be shown.
True, i didn't think of that
The cheek of it!
I always wonder what effect a media blackout would have on hostage takings. Do you think the number of incidents of it would reduce if the hostage takers realised it wouldnt get media coverage?
I suppose it would serve to make some people more sceptical about what the government wants us to see and what it wants kept hidden though...
I can't forgive The Sun for showing pictures of Foe as he died on the football field, and I can't forgive the Evening Standard for showing graphic pictures of a woman who had committed suicide out of a tower block before even her husband had been told. That was just cheap journalism, all about the shock to sell papers.
I think in trying to avoid censorship we are creating a media which can, and does, do anything in order to sell a paper. Sod the dignity of the victims, lets get some blood on the front page.