The big debate among news directors: show the Virginia killings video or not? Easy call here. You show it. It's NEWS!
It's always puzzled me why we censor videos like this? Would we have not shown the images in Guyana? What about the Vietnam War? Auschwitz? So now we're not going to show Virginia? It's too violent and disturbing. Really now, any more violent than parents taking their kids to the movies to see exploding heads, blood and guts, your standard retail carnage, but that's OK? Please.
Let me get this straight. We're not going to show the video but we have no problem with our kids playing violent video games. We're going to sanitize our own social being because suddenly we're worried about the kids seeing three people getting shot by some lunatic on live TV? Please.
Let's face it. We're a violent society to begin with. America, land of guns and butter. I'm not preaching about gun control now so don't start a debate here but overall, it seems to me we're a bit hypocritical. We deal with violence every day in this country in one form or the other. Therefore I find it rather odd that we're going to censor some video that was on the Internet already and was probably watched my millions of people. Including your teenage kids too.
Seriously now.
*Follow me on Twitter
Viewers have become pussified, and News Directors and GM's tow whatever "social media" trend that happens.
ReplyDeleteI'm waiting for the "How to stay safe on liveshots" Liveshot...or shots in the newsroom with all the faces blurred.
Hate to be blunt...but many in TV would have provided Williams/Vester a "list"........not some apple pie couple.
At least the 'PR Flack" survived!
ReplyDeleteWhat? Too Soon?
The great Jeff Ross
DeleteHere's another twist to the troubles befalling WDBJ-7 in Roanoke.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.roanoke.com/news/local/roanoke/fcc-hits-wdbj-with-proposed-indecency-fine/article_f9c2a1b6-0f9a-50a9-8f9b-d02c0f2079ac.html
I, too, ache over the circumstances of the dual-murders this week and the fact that this massacre was "live shot" before a large audience.
However, this note about the station's FCC troubles for $325,000 has not once been mentioned.
It's been a tough year for WDBJ-7. A very tough year.
http://www.roanoke.com/news/local/roanoke/fcc-hits-wdbj-with-proposed-indecency-fine/article_f9c2a1b6-0f9a-50a9-8f9b-d02c0f2079ac.html
We won't play the video, but we let people like Christine spew her hateful Anti-Israel rhetoric & grandiose righteousness. Put her in her place!!
ReplyDeleteChristine is an embarrassment. She's still licking her wounds after making an ass of herself here by proclaiming to know the reasons why the lunatic massacred the journalists. Her only defense was to correct her critics' grammar. Pathetic!
DeleteYou and your "colleague" at 9:45, are you also targeting Kay Steiger for the initial reporting re: the psyche and circumstance of the killer? While Mr."Williams" was still on the run, the first reporting re motive, the bit I mentioned on this blog, using the word "apparently", was that the shooter was an "ex-boyfriend of one of the victims, presumably Parker" (see Think Progress.org) . I'll have some more information of the killer's past history at several television stations and his treatment of women, specifically. That will be discussed "on a different platform", tomorrow evening.
DeleteRe: the controversial video(s), and those who claim it should not be aired because it "shows" two people being murdered, does it really show that? Are you sure, for example , that the female victim was actually hit by that first volley of bullets? By some of the logic exhibited here, you wouldn't show the Zapruder film, or the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, or the cop shooting that fellow in the back most recently...right? Anon at 10:11 claims you'd have to be a "bottom feeder" to actually watch the video being discussed here. Does he realize that there is no blood, no gore, no bodies, no death etc. visible in those videos?
You'd have to be a real bottom feeder to watch the video, Not a journalistic decision. A decision based on if it will boost ratings make money gain advantage over competitors. This is the very definition of tabloid journalism.
ReplyDeleteThis is why no one respects the media. Just because you spout some nonsense about journalistic integrity doesn't make it true. Splash the horrific violence against someone's lived one all over print/electronic media makes you a stoned cold bottom feeder. No one wants to be informed of a murdered loved one by seeing it happen. This isn't like a bridge collapse or explosion where the idea us to notify the publuc of a disaster.
Inexcusable disgusting display of savagery by an uncivilized culture. But we're the country that is afraid to take on the NRA. The embrace if violence is in the genes of Americans. Too many love ut.
I agree.
ReplyDeletePreface the video with a warning, and then show the entire content. That gives people the chance to turn away, hit mute, walk out of the room, change the channel, etc., if they are not interested in watching that segment.
I find it more offensive when the government decides not show us evidence that Osama Bin Laden's head was really blown off. I want to see those images. I also want to see the flag draped caskets of our soldiers coming home after wars (anyone recall the Bush administration not allowing news organizations to take those pictures?).
ReplyDeleteI think videos of people jumping off buildings on 9/11 should've been shown as well as the beheadings by ISIS and the horrific killing of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS when he was burned alive in a cage then a pile of rocks thrown on top of him and then bulldozed. All of that needs to be shown and if people don't want to watch just turn the channel.
Ditto moi!
DeleteAND, I want to see the mug shots of Bay Area criminals (names, too, would be helpful)
I agree. Take the time to look up just about any TIME magazine and what is published around the world vs. what is published here in the U.S. for the same month/year issue. You will see that the U.S. population is treated as if we are all children. It's no wonder so many people are out of touch with global issues. There is a significant population in the U.S. who are uninformed and therefore come to the wrong conclusions regarding current issues.
DeleteDisagree. Why give this psychopath easy access to media outlets? To allow him to horrifically poke his finger in American society's eye?
ReplyDeleteYou want to see it, look for it, but media outlets should not allow him to take away- or to posthumously steal - their dignity.
You sell out any and all dignity the second you sign up for Facebook and Twitter. Everyone and Anyone is "The Media".
ReplyDeleteThe video will be swown no matter what.
You don't show the video on TV....
ReplyDeleteYou tell the viewers to click on the station webpage to see it there.
Click...click...clicks!
We can all agree this is a tragic event. After that, everyone will try to plant their own flag of what's "acceptable". Let's stick to the fact there have been MULTIPLE incidents of shootings(and related deaths) this year and only the most note worthy get mentioned in major media outlets. Why? It's all about ratings, ergo money. The more popular a time slot, the more valuable the commercial time. Violence is a part of our culture, but only sanitized violence. As a country, we need to confront reality head on. The video should be shown for a purpose other than ratings. Make the video accessible to make people aware of the damage and pain guns can do in the wrong hands. If we want to continue to embrace our right to bear arms then as a nation, we need to prove we have the responsibility to have this right. Implement mandatory annual psyche evals, background checks and safety courses to have a gun permit and anyone caught with a gun without a permit or isn't up to date on their annual re-cert, should be charged with a felony.
ReplyDeleteI imagine the next shooter is out there and has the thing on a loop. Will not airing it prevent someone interested in viewing it from finding it elsewhere? No. I do think not showing it might show some respect for your audience though. Hell, I remember when just one of these heinous shootings was enough to put people into a funk for a week or more, now it's just today's news and something else is tomorrow's daily outrage. Not sure if that is better or worse.
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere about the "Some A**hole" procedure. Every shooter or culprit is identified only as "Some A**hole" as in "Some A**hole just shot a our news crew" or "Some A**hole just ate his gun rather than give up to the cops." Show the news, don't give the a**hole the publicity he so fervently asks for. How about that?
ReplyDelete