Okay, some things are not made for tv

[luvmy3]

I don't think my logic is flawed, but that is my opinion. This isn't anything new , doesn't anyone remember the Wide World of Sports every Saturday, during the opening, The Agony of Defeat, that got shown everyday, it was pretty graphic. What about race car drivers, that gets shown over and over again.

What about them? Why would you assume I feel differently about those things being shown?
And in your post you were talking about these athletes knowing the dangers of their sport. This isn't about that, its about NBC deciding to show the graphic footage of this mans death. And don't care that he died in the trauma center, the accident caused it and it doesn't need to be re-aired over and over again. Of course thats where the ratings are and its just a sick testimony to what our society has become.

To be fair, you're engaging in your own hyperbole there. The fact that the competitor was "young" only serves to tug at heartstrings. I doubt you'd be able to adequately justify the difference between a 21 year old and a 31 year old, in this regard.

I described him as a young man because thats what he is, he is 21 just barely into adulthood and to my age of mid thirtes that is young. And of course I wouldn't be able to justify the difference in age of a 21 and 31 in this regard, in fact I wouldn't even try

 

[mhsjax]

What about them? Why would you assume I feel differently about those things being shown?
And in your post you were talking about these athletes knowing the dangers of their sport. This isn't about that, its about NBC deciding to show the graphic footage of this mans death. And don't care that he died in the trauma center, the accident caused it and it doesn't need to be re-aired over and over again. Of course thats where the ratings are and its just a sick testimony to what our society has become.



I described him as a young man because thats what he is, he is 21 just barely into adulthood and to my age of mid thirtes that is young. And of course I wouldn't be able to justify the difference in age of a 21 and 31 in this regard, in fact I wouldn't even try

I really don't think that NBC needs anything to boost ratings during the Olympics do you?

 

[bicker]

I described him as a young man because thats what he is, he is 21 just barely into adulthood and to my age of mid thirtes that is young. And of course I wouldn't be able to justify the difference in age of a 21 and 31 in this regard, in fact I wouldn't even try

The point is that those words were unnecessary to make your point, but yet you included them anyway.

 

[bicker]

I really don't think that NBC needs anything to boost ratings during the Olympics do you?

Actually, they very well might.

 

[VickiVM]

Completely unnecessary! The same story could have been told on the news without the replay of the young man careening into the metal beam that caused his death over and over again. You can evoke the same emotions of horror about his death and concerns over the condition of the track WITHOUT showing the impact his body took after he lost control. Or the close up footage of medics, covered in blood, giving him CPR.

It is simply distasteful and disrespectful and has no place on a family oriented program. It did not serve any useful purpose to the audience at large (how many of our children were contemplating olympic luge as a sport??).

Does the news media have the right to air this - of course. But that doesn't make it a wise choice on their part. I hardly think we (society) would feel our rights or freedoms compromised if the horrific images were left out of the story-telling of the news broadcast.

Shame on you, NBC!

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

...Our family doesn't believe in sheltering kids from the world around them, rather we prefer to use positive and negative events as educational tools.

That's cool, but (as a parent) there are some images that a child is simply not prepared for, nor can they be explained to un unformed mind. They just create horror.

I still wouldn't censor - I just don't turn it on...

 

[VickiVM]

I am a proponent of all information being shown to everyone, whether it is happy or sad.

This wasn't simply a sad story. This was graphic and horrific to watch. Sometimes you cannot avoid seeing this kind of violent death...passing a fatal car accident on your way to work, a live telecast of Nascar when an accident occurs. Beyond human control sometimes. But the practice run was not a televised event and the news story could have been watered down for primetime viewing during a televised event marketed to the entire population to view.

It is not a journalists responsibility to balance "happy or sad" stories. But they do have a responsibilty to consider their target audience and report responsibly.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

That's cool, but (as a parent) there are some images that a child is simply not prepared for, nor can they be explained to un unformed mind. They just create horror.

Just a note, when I said family, I was also referring to my direct family and inlaws who have children of different ages.

Children understand or have the capability of understanding more then we choose to give them credit for. What is most often the case it seems is parents choose to shelter their kids and use the excuse they wouldn't understand. Its all about explaining to them in terms they understand, while broadening their understanding.

 

[VickiVM]

Just a note, when I said family, I was also referring to my direct family and inlaws who have children of different ages.

Children understand or have the capability of understanding more then we choose to give them credit for. What is most often the case it seems is parents choose to shelter their kids and use the excuse they wouldn't understand. Its all about explaining to them in terms they understand, while broadening their understanding.

Don't buy that. We protect children from such images for a reason. And as parents (since you've already said you're not a parent, you have no frame of reference), we trust that a program that is on TV @ 6:30 pm and marketed as a family show will not show such images. It was not a breaking story. It was relevant to tell the story, but not necessary to show the images.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Just a note, when I said family, I was also referring to my direct family and inlaws who have children of different ages.

Children understand or have the capability of understanding more then we choose to give them credit for. What is most often the case it seems is parents choose to shelter their kids and use the excuse they wouldn't understand. Its all about explaining to them in terms they understand, while broadening their understanding.

Look, believe what you want, but actually raising children has shown me that this is not always true. My first born son was/is very mature for his age. He has never had problems with scary images or movies. But my second son sleepwalks and gets night terrors if we even let him hear scary noises. He couldn't sleep in our new home for months because of the sounds that the baseboard heating made (we had forced air heat before). I can't even let him watch movies rated PG if there is a scary scene.

Not all children are the same. Some are very sensitive...

 

[Zdog]

This was a terrible story, plain and simple. There is no getting around that. No one turns on their TV, especially early in the evening and over the network airwaves no less and with child nearby, and expects to see a person die.

I've worked in television news for much of my life, and can say the station I work for, an ABC affiliate in upstate New York, made the editorial decision to not run the video. There was absolutely no viewer benefit to showing such graphic images. Our business is to inform, educate, enlighten, and mainly, to get people to watch, not to turn them away or repulse. I can not speak for the vast majority of stations that chose to run with this.

As we all know, it's not difficult to find gore, which is typically a mouse click away. Perhaps I enjoy Disney as much as I do, because it's the antithesis of gore, and the raw reality of life. I welcome healthy debate on this issue, and based on the postings here, many people have been affected by this.

I also urge you not to paint all news people and media outlets with the same broad brush stroke.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Look, believe what you want, but actually raising children has shown me that this is not always true. My first born son was/is very mature for his age. He has never had problems with scary images or movies. But my second son sleepwalks and gets night terrors if we even let him hear scary noises. He couldn't sleep in our new home for months because of the sounds that the baseboard heating made (we had forced air heat before). I can't even let him watch movies rated PG if there is a scary scene.

Not all children are the same. Some are very sensitive...

I realize I don't have children of my own, but I have watched my family raise their children, I am well aware of their methods, and it has worked pretty well for them.

Also, doesn't it become a self fulfilling prophecy then, you start to shelter the child and then they become even more sensistive to it?

 

[VickiVM]

Look, believe what you want, but actually raising children has shown me that this is not always true. My first born son was/is very mature for his age. He has never had problems with scary images or movies. But my second son sleepwalks and gets night terrors if we even let him hear scary noises. He couldn't sleep in our new home for months because of the sounds that the baseboard heating made (we had forced air heat before). I can't even let him watch movies rated PG if there is a scary scene.

Not all children are the same. Some are very sensitive...

None of my kids are fans of horror/scary movies and I have two teens and a pre-teen. But they've been exposed to it plenty because my husband loves that genre of films. So my kids don't watch. Even though they've had the exposure and the opportunity to be de-sensitized to these images, and they can rationlize that it's not real - they won't watch movies with horrific images. No one is going out of the way to shelter them from this - they just feel their senses assaulted when they catch glimpses of the movies. (Now I make my husband watch only when the kids are gone or on the tv in our bedroom...I hate horror films also).

 

[VickiVM]

This was a terrible story, plain and simple. There is no getting around that. No one turns on their TV, especially early in the evening and over the network airwaves no less and with child nearby, and expects to see a person die.

I've worked in television news for much of my life, and can say the station I work for, an ABC affiliate in upstate New York, made the editorial decision to not run the video. There was absolutely no viewer benefit to showing such graphic images. Our business is to inform, educate, enlighten, and mainly, to get people to watch, not to turn them away or repulse. I can not speak for the vast majority of stations that chose to run with this.

As we all know, it's not difficult to find gore, which is typically a mouse click away. Perhaps I enjoy Disney as much as I do, because it's the antithesis of gore, and the raw reality of life. I welcome healthy debate on this issue, and based on the postings here, many people have been affected by this.

I also urge you not to paint all news people and media outlets with the same broad brush stroke.

Good for your station! I agree totally and appreciate your comments on behalf of media.

 

[VickiVM]

Also, doesn't it become a self fulfilling prophecy then, you start to shelter the child and then they become even more sensistive to it?

No.

But, as parents, we do protect children from images, events and behaviors.

Don't confuse 'sheltering' with 'protecting'. I don't think anyone who feels the news coverage was way over the top and inappropriate is wanting to convey a message to their children that nothing bad ever happens at the Olympics or while participating in sports.

 

[pirateofthecarolinas]

I don't find that not wanting your children to watch an athlete's death as being over protective or too sheltering.

We gathered around the TV as a family to watch the opening ceremonies. NBC advertised it as coverage starts at 7:30. I had no idea that it didn't start until 8:00. Fortunately, I was able to grab the remote in time to change the channel.

As parents, we do the best that we know how. I personally don't want my children to be desensitized by death.

 

[bicker]

I still wouldn't censor - I just don't turn it on...

This is generally the perfect solution. Let them broadcast what they think best serves their objectives, then we can decide whether we want to watch or not. That's utterly fair and proper.

It is not a journalists responsibility to balance "happy or sad" stories. But they do have a responsibilty to consider their target audience and report responsibly.

And telling people, "This may be troubling to some viewers..." (or whatever it is that they said) fulfills their responsibilities in this regard, totally.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

I realize I don't have children of my own, but I have watched my family raise their children, I am well aware of their methods, and it has worked pretty well for them.

Like I said, not all children are the same. What worked for one of my children does not work for the other, and they are brothers raised in the same home.

Also, doesn't it become a self fulfilling prophecy then, you start to shelter the child and then they become even more sensistive to it?

Not for mine - didn't shelter either until it became clear that certain things disturbed one. Still don't shelter the other.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

The young man's family was just on. His father was a luger (?sp) also and said he has not watched the video. He can't. He was sobbing and kissing his son's picture. Another woman in the village also has a son who's a luger, the two young men grew up together. She was sobbing also.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Re children watching accident. We came home specifically last night because DS12 couldn't wait to watch the Olympics, especially the opening ceremonies. We ate dinner as we watched. Over and over they replayed the accident. Both my kids (a DD12 too) were ok watching it, but kind of couldn't believe their eyes. Not exactly something you want to see while eating. They were fine, but I just didn't see the need to play it repeatedly. Once would have been enough. JMO

ETA neither DH nor I recall there being a warning about graphic footage. It's possible we missed it while we were preparing dinner.