Is all the news that fit to print?
In essence, the primary job of a journalist is to be a conduit – to take a remote experience and relay it to the reader. Of course, there is much more to the job than that. Not to mention that both methods and mediums differ on a wide scale.
But, in essence, the job of the journalist is to record and relay an event to his or her readers/listeners/ viewers. That’s what we strive to do – immerse our audience in the experience and give them an accurate account of what is going on in the world around them. It does not matter if these events take place in university laboratory, on a foreign battlefield, or on a city street just a few blocks away.
But can we do it too well?
Some listeners of National Public Radio’s Morning Show have argued so. On April 7th, the public broadcaster reported on the story of a young Pakistani girl being flogged by the Taliban. The public punishment was handed out to the girl because she committed the grave sin of not being in the presence of her husband while out.
What elevated this story from your all-too-common inhuman treatment of women under fanatical rule was the fact that the flogging was caught on video. And NPR used the audio of the woman’s tortured screams in their piece. (You can hear NPR’s piece here. Fair warning: it’s, not surprisingly, not pleasant to listen to.)
Commenters on NPR’s website weren’t exactly kind. They called the inclusion of the sound clip “cheap,” below the standards of NPR. They were accused of sensationalizing and told 7 AM is not the time to air “adult content.”
The question is: exactly what time is appropriate for a public flogging? Surely not before noon, yes?
This isn’t the first time this kind of debate has been held. There’s no question that we’re getting more and more familiar with graphic images being displayed in the media. Videos of a airliner slamming into the World Trade Center. Bodies floating in the water-logged streets of New Orleans. Afghani civilians being rushed to hospital after bombs go off.
And every time, someone crows about how journalists sensationalize the news – that publishing such images is somehow disrespectful to the high ideals journalists are supposed to strive for.
But to sensationalize something is to puff it up, give it the illusion of importance far beyond what actually exists. That’s not what NPR is doing here: it’s not a disservice to their listeners. In fact, they are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Of course the audio is heart-wrenching and disturbing; that’s because the story it comes from is the same.
I’m not arguing that for evening newscasts and front pages smeared with blood and brain matter. That would be inappropriate and vile. At the same time, it would be just as vile to descend into self-censorship in hopes of keeping our pages sterile and unsullied.
Gone are the days of stoic, emotionless newscasters with deep, unwavering voices. Journalists must always attempt to be accurate and fair, and not to chase ratings and readership with bold, sensational headlines. But at the same time, we should never feel the need to separate events from emotion. Sometimes, bad things happen. Horrific, tragic, terrible things. And we are do a disservice to the audience if we don’t try and convey those feelings in our reporting.
The point of news is to inform and capture the audience’s attention, not to comfort and sooth. An infuriating story should boil the blood. A tragic event should inspire a sick feeling of hollowness and ache.
A news story is not a headline and a collection of sentences. It is a real event, that happens to real people, and causes real impact.
Treating it as anything less is the true disservice.
Also: (Via NPR’s Ombud is going about this the right way. She’s defending the station’s use of the audio, as well as the way it was presented.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Excellent post, Scott.
This reminds me of the example of the image of an individual who decided to jump out of a window of the WTC on Sept 11… The photo was published as a question of ethics and disrespect. But it happened.
Should a blind eye be turned to such imagery?
Reply