Pictures of suffering
An interesting debate is happening over on the Fleet Street forum, one of the lists in which I'm involved. Newsweek has published some pictures of the devastation caused by the appalling events in Madrid last week. So far, so good, they're doing their job.
However, one of the victims - I assume she's dead in the picture, I haven't seen it - has had her breast exposed by the blast. So you can see her bloodied nipple and her face.
The question exercising people on Fleet is this: is it the photographer's (and the magazine's) duty to show what's going on and not pull any punches, so the picture is justified, or should they bear in mind the appalling hurt suffered by the family, who may not want to see their deceased relative portrayed in this way in public?
For once I'm stumped. As one of the contributors has said, if we just report facts and say 'everyone was injured' it can sound like a slightly rough rugby match and we don't want to minimise what's actually happened out there. As another has said, this is an appalling personal tragedy and the reportage might actually make it worse.
I can see both sides, very clearly. There are times when I'm glad I write about technology and sometimes TV and radio, rather than important stuff.
|