In discussing the issue of whether a news outlet should run a picture due to its gruesome nature, or whether they should alter it to make it more “appropriate” for the public, or whether it should just not run at all – I always find myself on the side of running it raw.
In lecture, we specifically discussed how the NY Daily News altered the following picture to make it “runnable” on their cover.
The original picture is below:
The news outlet had adjusted the picture, darkening the area where the woman on the left’s leg had been blown off. In my opinion, the picture does not vary so drastically between the two pictures that an alteration was justified. In addition, I don’t feel as if the picture was in any way too much for a person to handle. If something horrible happens, people have a right to know what happened. They have a right to see all of the pictures, all of the footage raw – exactly as it was.
There was also some questions concerning the picture below:
It’s definitely extremely graphic and possibly more than some could handle, but I don’t believe that any news outlet would be at fault for running it. Journalists are supposed to portray and depict stories exactly as that happened – not in a way that makes it easier for people to stomach. Some things that happen in the world are hard to handle, but part of life is learning about and experiencing things that aren’t easy.