The Fall of Kabul | News Coverage
This is such a difficult dilemma. On the one hand, victims need to be treated with dignity and respect, but on the other, the world needs to know the full horror of what has happened. If media outlets sanitise output too much, events are trivialised. For instance, if the full horrors of the deeds committed by the Nazis were not fully known, would history have taken a different turn?

I do think a balance needs to be struck on TV and this is where the skill of journalism comes into play. The story needs to be told but in a way that doesn't disturb the audience too much and also shows respect to the victims of such atrocities. Personally, I think visual footage can only go so far. The gap should be bridged with the narration by the correspondent so that the full events are known but viewers can conjure up their own visual image should they wish to.

In terms of fictional violence, in my opinion less is more. I steer clear of most modern dramatised output, instead preferring programmes made between the 1950s and 1990s. I'd much rather watch an old black and white Perry Mason where the writing is superb and violence is kept to a minimum than the modern output which is just made for the shock factor. I don't know how some people sleep at night these days. And then they wonder why some people are so violent! No wonder when it's glorified so much in film and on TV.


Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Powered by MyBB, © 2002-2026 MyBB Group. Theme designed by m0ckingbird © 2015-2026.