Is it morally acceptable for TV News Broadcasters to air graphic violence, such as police shootings, car chases, and so on, on live TV? Why or why not?
2006-12-06 04:15:16 · 10 answers · asked by David 2 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
News is an entertainment business, not an information business. They want viewers, pure and simple. If shock sells to the sponsors then that's what they will show. They just need to stay as credible as it takes to keep viewers. THe rest is up for grabs. Don't believe anything you read and about half of what you see. The odd thing... I am an optimist...lol
2006-12-06 04:18:08 · answer #1 · answered by Scott M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it depends on just how graphic it is. If it's a shooting and and you are watching someone die...NO ! Car chases aren't all that bad because you really don't see anything that bad. If it's something like 911....that was sooo awful. And I don't think that should have been shown. Not only did it horrify me it horrified the kids. And the families of those poor souls , can you imagine what they went through watching people jumping out of windows 2+ stories up...it's too graphic. Sometimes I get caught off guard and see something I didn't want to see. And I sit there and bawl. I also have concern for children seeing these kind of things. I'm afraid they will become desensitized by what they see. Severely graphic scenes should not be shown. I know if one of my loved ones were to be killed in a bloody horrible car accident and I seen their dead mangled bodies on t.v., it would kill me. The media should have a limit as to how graphic such things should be seen. It's bad enough watching all of the violence on regular television...never mind seeing it when it's real.
2006-12-06 05:37:54 · answer #2 · answered by anndee 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i agree that i think of it fairly is misguided 'actuality' television looks to have outfitted a penchant for ever increasing 'marvel' values and then claiming that it fairly is breaking taboos which frankly is crap and in case you think it then shame on you maximum persons have experienced death - it fairly is a private matter - experiencing somebody elses death or grief - what does it acheive - does it make you have extra sympathy or information - if the answer to that's definite - lower back shame on you one way of finding at it fairly is that it fairly is floor breaking brave television pushing the envelope (words i'm particular they might use) - yet differently of finding at it fairly is that tehy are coping with a extreme difficulty in extremely a trivial and insulting way quarter to 9 - a lot of tears ten to 9 - a advantageous sip of killer cocktail 5 to 9 - a rapid death 9 o clock - placed on the kettle for the time of the ruin and watch for the x-ingredient effects come on - is absolutely everyone accessible certainly going to declare there's a line and we would desire to consistently not circulate it remember Viz - while Roger Mellie got here up with the belief for action picture star ******** the place they poke a digital camera up someones **** to locate which action picture star it replaced into - properly i think of channel 5 did something very comparable - goodness me how academic ... actuality television - made via ***** for ***** - EDIT - to function to the factor made above - i dont have a topic with an informative application approximately assisted suicide - yet WHY teach the actually death, is there any reason different than sensationalism and marvel fee for doing this - and that i dont think of this is a knee-jerk reaction on my section - maximum persons does not agree for the death of their kin to be experienced via others, so why do they think of it fairly is appropriate to observe the death of somebody else's ?
2016-12-11 03:23:50 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe not acceptable morally, but they have to warn that some material may be graphic, etc. etc. You have heard that I am sure. They always warn you before they show something violent.
2006-12-06 04:23:32 · answer #4 · answered by makeitright 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Morally? Sure. If it's newsworthy, they need to show it. Is it in good taste? That's between them, their viewers and their advertisers.
2006-12-06 04:17:50 · answer #5 · answered by Teekno 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because it's insulting for the people participating in the event.
2006-12-06 04:18:36 · answer #6 · answered by Karina M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they have to report the news.
hey, the crap available on the net, and video games, make the real stuff look so in significant
2006-12-06 04:19:24 · answer #7 · answered by duster 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure. That's what makes it newsworthy. No one is forced to watch, and shouldn't if they are offended.
2006-12-06 04:28:09 · answer #8 · answered by jenjen 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, its offensive to the family of those being photographed.
2006-12-06 07:14:28 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you prefer them to show them through rose colored glasses and pretend that it did not happen?
2006-12-06 04:20:37 · answer #10 · answered by Dreamweaver 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋