On one hand I think people have a right to know. But on the other hand how much is too much? How gruesome is too far? How many pictures are too many? Photographers have been struggling with this line since the first wartime photographs were shot during the Mexican-American war.
In the past the government has regulated the dissemination of news photo, film and video. But with the internet and this free flow of information that regulation is now in the direct hands of the people. And I'm not sure we, as a society, are making the best choices in what to share. We've lost all regard for privacy, human dignity and compassion. We as viewers pour over the images of the carnage and become detached and desensitized. We forget that each of those victims lying bloody on the pavement is a person. and we gobble up every single scrap of media we can. When images of horrific events are thrust at us over and over they cease to have impact for many.
Does anyone remember back on September 11th when the media decided to stop playing video of the World Trade Center buildings collapsing? One network said it was taking away the impact of a horrific event. After one network stopped most of the others followed suit. I really think the internet needs to take a cue from the network exec who had the guts to make that call back then.
I am glad that the photos and video were able to help police. It's not the first time that has happened, but certainly one of the most high profile recent cases. But having those photos and videos doesn't mean that they all need to be shared with the public. The story can be told, the horror can be conveyed, without showing every single bloody body. In fact, a few key images would have a lot more impact.
Putting my soapbox away now.
