The next time you feel moral outrage at an image or a news report, you might think about venting a bit of that anger at the news 'provider' or 'writer' or 'photographer'. The news media is an industry, a business, with an aim to provoke a reaction, and garner profit—i.e. by presenting a view that will invoke emotions.
The nature of news 'gathering and presentation' in unstable and violent areas, of necessity, often implies the need for personal courage and risk by reporters—at least that's my underlying assumption. And of course, there's underlying 'bias' depending on organisational politics, the pose or frame or angle selected to tell the story or present the image, which does not of necessity imply moral turpitude.
But there's a line of transgression when exploitation is premeditated to such a degree, as in the image in this article of reporters squatting like vultures around Fabianne Cherisma's corpse, that the lie of a random image becomes a violation of decency and humanity.
I'm currently so enraged that I'm of opinion that the fabrication of 'a scene encountered in a chaotic land by a reporter seeking to expose crimes' is such a falsification as to make the messenger worthy of having her tongue pulled out or his eyes seared—at least their camera trigger finger lopped off.
No comments:
Post a Comment