Uncompromising Journalism vs Acts of Crass Insensitivity

In the textbook reading this week, I was most struck by the introduction about the shooting of police officers in 1998 and the coverage that the Age newspaper ran on it, including a photograph in which the bodies were clearly seen.

Editor at the time Michael Gawenda responded to publishing this photograph by saying:

"What happened was confronting and shocking. I think this reinforced in peple's minds the horror of what happened. If I had the choice again, I'd publish that photograph."

(Weekend Australian, 1998, p.29)

This situation was reminiscent of the shooting of two brothers in Mayfield this year. The Daily Telegraph's first story that they ran about the shooting showed a photograph in which you could clearly see the bodies of the slain brothers on the footpath. I remember being incredibly shocked to see that image, especially as I had been in the area a short time after the shooting and had seen how carefully the area had been concealed by police to hide the grim scene from the public. 

Within a matter of hours the photograph had been removed and replaced with one that was much less obvious, but the initial photograph had highlighted the way in which there is a duplicitous nature between public interest and private lives. While it was an event I had developed an interest in due to being in the area at the time of the shooting and it happening near where I live, it was still such a shock to see such a graphic image and something that I am unsure that I wanted to see. 

It also highlights the concept of whether things such as this are uncompromosing journalism, or rather acts of crass insensitivity, as worded within the textbook. I see this as being particularly relevant when it comes to reporting on crimes and accidents, especially as the public do see these things as greatly in their interest as it will have an effect on their sense of safety and may impact upon their lives, but then on the other hand those who are actually closely connected to the crime or accidents, such as family and friends of victims may not want graphic details of the death of their loved one to be portrayed within the media.

Ian Richards, in his contribution to Journalism: Theory in Practice (Tapsall & Varley, 2008), he examines the potential reasoning behind news reports such as this, stating:

" It could be seen as an increasingly common form of media behaviour that is, at best, confronting to many readers and, at worst, disturbing to others, especially children."

(2008, p.187)

It is a fine line that journalists must tread upon sensitivelywhen they are reporting such sensitive and horrific matters, especially due to the ambiguous lines that divide what is public interest and what is invading someones private life.