Displaying the Death of Gaddafi in the Media

In the past week the death of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi has made the headlines in the news and front pages of every news paper. Along with the stories some news outlets chose to show graphic images of Gaddafi after he had been killed. Now one of the major issues is whether or not the media should of displayed these pictures like they did.

In an article by Poynter, it shows how differently certain countries news papers decided to show images to go with these stories. Very few American newspapers actually showed Gaddafi's body after being killed.

In the newspapers in other countries some papers showed photos of Gaddafi before he we killed or photos of the rebels celebrating. However most of the newspapers decided to show the pictures of Gaddafi after being killed.

Is it appropriate to be showing these brutal photos of the death of Gaddafi?

Many people say that the tolerance of these images is starting to rise. In an interview for MSNBC Kelly McBride said that this is occurring because more people search for gruesome images then expected, then when they see them in the media it doesn't bother them.

The Week ran an article that saying that many news companies are defending their decision to show these images. They state that by showing theses photos they allow the public to know that Gaddafi is in fact dead.

Many people feel showing images like these in the media is now becoming unavoidable. The thing that the media needs to do now is decide how exactly to show these images.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzfX_0jtyJs

Read more...

The Babysitter's Club

If a picture is worth 1000 words, then an interview is worth an afternoon babysitting two teens.

According to an article from The Huffington Post, major news outlets are jockeying for the first interview with Amanda Knox with offers of babysitting Knox's two half sisters.

ABC, NBC, and CBS have all been questioned as whether they offered to look after the two girls during the trial.

While ABC's spokesperson replied with no comment, and NBC's and CBS's spokespeople denied the claims, Knox's father, Curt Knox, responded with a letter to the New York Post regarding the babysitting allegations. He stated in his letter that ABC and CBS provided rooms for his girls to stay in during the trial, and an NBC producer offered a room; however, he went on to state that no producer babysat his daughters.

These allegations, whether they are unfounded or not, pose a serious ethical dilemma to journalists every where. Quotes bring a human element into a story that news reporters can't do on their own.

Amanda Knox and other high-profile celebrities are people who readers want to hear from. Thus, due to Knox's interviewee status, her popularity can demand a price for her story.

Paying for an interview is unethical. If an interviewee doesn't want to tell his/her story without compensation, then it is up to journalists to compile a story using every other source at their disposal.

Although, the story may not feel as complete without Amanda Knox's quote but purchasing an interview is unethical to me. I believe that my credibility is worth more than a slumber party-sized pillow fight between babysitters in order to capitalize on Knox's passing 15 minutes of fame.

Photo by http://www.flickr.com/photos/ericskiff/3415034468/

Read more...

Ethics in social media?

As Facebook, blogging, and Twitter have changed the way that news is delivered, many journalist are pushing to ensure that the same ethical principles are applied across the board for all journalist.

The Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA) recently joined the efforts. "The guideline talk about truth and fairness, and how it's reflected in social media; how we Tweet or text, and how we use it in newsgathering. It looks at how we can better our transparency with our audience, so that they can see how we cover the news," Stacey Woelfel, chairman of the RTDNA said in regards to social medial guidelines.

These new guidelines will be good, as many orgainizations don't have ethical guidelines for dealing with the digital world.

Andy Schotz, chairman of the Society of Professional Journalists Ethics Committee, also said that the SPJ would be looking into their Code of Ethics this year to see if changes are needed in light of increased social media usage.

There isn't a need to reinvent the wheel here, journalist have a Code of Ethics. If journalist want to use social media outlets, they should stand by that same code.

Whatever codes are decided on there needs to be consistancy between digital and traditional journalist.

Read more...

How Much Do We Need to Know?

In 1990, a man dubbed the Gainesville Ripper raped, murdered, and mutilated five college age women in the town of Gainesville, Florida. 17 year old Sonja Larson was one of those women. At some point during the investigation, photos of the crime scenes where the young women were found began to be questioned. Media lawyer Tom Julin, argued for the release of crime scene photos, claiming that in order to maintain the integrity of an open court system, the public has a right to see information such as this.

Wait... wait... this story is over ten years old? Or did I just hear it? The situation sounds familiar.

Recent debate regarding the release of a video tape portraying SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau being attacked by a killer whale, and attempts by a reporter for Hustler magazine to obtain crime scene photos of murder victim Meredith Emerson, have brought older media rights cases to the front line again. They have also raised very important questions for both journalists and media consumers: How much, exactly, does the public need to know?

The terms "sealed documents" and "gag order" have been thrown around much more frequently in the past few years. Due to vast amounts of instantaneous information we have access to, court officials have had to issue these in order to protect both plaintiff and defendant during the proceedings. How is a person going to have a fair trial with photographs floating around showing the criminal acts? Casey Anthony is a perfect example; images showing her partying during the time her two year old child was missing were splashed over the Internet and other sources of news even before her trial began. This was obviously damaging to her defense case, and advantageous for the prosecution. When the trial out of the court room into our living rooms, the information becomes subject to public judgement. Can a person be convicted even before the trial begins?

Ada Larson, mother of murder victim Sonja, described to CNN how devastated she would have been if crime scene photos of her daughter's mutilated body had been flashed over the papers and on the news.

"We did not want our loved ones to be put out there in the scenes where they were found..." she stated regarding the case.

In the Gainesville trial, the judge involved ruled that the media and public could see the 700 crime scene photos, but no copies could be made. This action helped to prevent the photos from being republished time and time again.

Media representatives state that their goal is not to cause harm to the victims or their families, but they also say the public interest regarding these cases has to be respected as well. Rachel Fugate, a media attorney in the state of Florida, states that part of the media's responsibility is to provide verification of facts; this is especially important in situations where there are multiple reports and stories racing through the channels. She does understand, however, that the families of victims need to be respected.

"We are not advocating that the photographs be released or that they be published or broadcast in any manner," she said. "We want the opportunity to inspect."

Inspect, yes. But how far does inspection go? With everyone having cameras on their cell phones, is it truly possible to issue a gag order? A jury sees a crime scene photo and one member snaps a shot with his camera, and sends it to a friend, who sends it to a friend, and so on. Though the member of the jury ultimately may be charged with something, that image is still out there for all to see. Because, in today's world, we have access to everything we could ever want to see at our fingertips if you search hard enough for it.

Note my own experience writing this blog. I typed "Gainesville Ripper" into Google to just get some basic information on the case, and instantly was presented with several links to crime scene photos, and various other crime images, some of which had nothing to do with my search query. Try as we might, we can't protect ourselves from everything. Perhaps the public is served by having media view such images, but beyond that, I personally believe it is a great disservice to everyone involved if the images are released too broadly and splashed across the internet for all to see.

Read more...