But in this case, we have a news organization airing footage of a death in the event it is covering. We might criticize ESPN for showing video of a hypothetical Piazza killing bat shard from Clemmons in heave rotation on SportsCenter, but would we really criticize Fox for showing it a few times during the game if it was covering it? If NBC starts showing the video in question every night, or featuring it in their promos for the Olympics, or if Bob Costas goes on the Tonight Show Leno's first week back and shows the video, then I will understand the criticism. But to show it briefly, and in the context of reporting the news of the day at an event they are covering seems simply to be doing their job.
I guess more than just having a difference of opinion, I am not understanding the underlying principle being invoked by critics of NBC. Is it that news organizations should never show images of dead people under any circumstance? What is the rationale for such a principle? I wonder Dave if you or others would feel differently about this if, as a result of seeing this video, the organizers of the Olympics decide to pad those pillars, or modify the course, to try to avoid another serious injury? Of if they fail to make these changes, and there is another serious or fatal incident on that track - wouldn't the public have a right to know the context so they could make an informed judgment about the cause of such "accidents" (quotations marks because they might arguably not be accidents if their likelihood was predicted ahead of time). I am surprised that so much of the email in my inboox (not from this list, but from friends) tonight was to express outrage at NBC for simply showing us what happened, and none directed at the organizers of the games who seemed to place so little value on the safety of the athletes. On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 1:01 AM, David Bruggeman <[email protected]> wrote: > I doubt I'm going to persuade those who have no problem with this, but I > want to first clarify part of my argument, since it might have been > misunderstood. > > I was not referring to late night talk shows grabbing random injury footage > and repeating it, but airing footage of injuries of guests (or in Conan's > case, the hose) either in the context of an interview, or in connection with > their appearance to do a trick/jump/stunt. In no way are any of these meant > to be funny, and were - for the ones I can think of - aired only after the > individual had been treated and/or recovered from the injury. Had these > athletes died, I have a hard time seeing how the fatal acts would have even > been broadcast. > > My take on this new baseball example - the network shouldn't show the > impact of the throw, as I find it little different from a snuff film. Had > Clemens drawn blood or seriously injured Piazza back in 2000 with that > jagged shard of bat, I would hope that footage never made heavy rotation on > Fox (but would probably have that dashed). I wasn't happy with outlets that > have aired footage of Daniel Pearl's beheading, Saddam Hussein's execution, > or the death of the one Iranian protester last summer that hit the > interwebs. > > For the record, I'm also not crazy about the big crash footage (Paris Air > Show back in the day, various people driving cars into crowds, etc.) being > broadcast either. I'm not a fan of Jackass or America's Funniest Home > Videos (accident/crotch bashing division) either, but there's an attention > whore aspect to those programs that complicates things. > > FWIW, I'm not convinced that NBC would have sacrificed their journalistic > imperatives in the service of a feel good sentimentality that pervades > Olympic coverage by not showing footage of the lethal accident. They will > sacrifice those imperatives once they air the treacly profile of the man > shortly before the men's luge finals. > > A question I've seen asked that seems relevant - would we have seen this > footage if it was an American luger who died? I have my doubts. > > David > > ------------------------------ > *From:* PGage <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Sat, February 13, 2010 2:51:20 AM > *Subject:* Re: [TV orNotTV] Not exactly the best thing... > > I don't defend the repeating of the video in question on late night talk > shows or other entertainment shows. I have not seen any other coverage of > this except for NBC's in the Opening Ceremonies. But NBC is covering the > Olympics, at least in part as a news (and sports, which is part of news) > event. When you are covering an event on television news and you have video > of the event, you show it. > > Imagine this: A pitcher is angry at a hitter who grandstanded after hitting > a homerun. In the next at bat he throws at the hitter, hitting him in the > head and killing him. I don't think you would see any network covering that > game showing only computer generated animations of it. > > NBC did not sensationalize it, they did not hype it, they did not dwell on > it. I thought they showed good judgment and restraint in covering a > difficult story. I think the real temptation would have been for them to > sacrifice their journalistic imperatives in the service of the extended > "feel good" sentimentality that is the heart of what will drive viewership > for the next 2 weeks, and I am glad they did not do that. > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:34 PM, David Bruggeman <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I think the decision was wrong, and likely due to an unnecessary (IMO) >> rush to get a video story out. >> >> You couldn't jury rig a simulation clip? You had to watch the actual >> injury? Show a clip of the curve in question and use a telestrator to point >> out where he hit and went over. Maybe it would take a little time to put >> together, but you can have a ticker notice or brief breaking news read to >> address the main story (athlete dead in training run) and give the details >> later. >> >> I don't agree about the baseball example, in part because I think it hard >> to see a situation where showing the footage of getting hit in the head >> would add significant information to the story. And I have a hard time >> seeing any situation where that would actually be broadcast after the live >> coverage of the game was halted. Same with those few unfortunate boxing >> matches where a fighter died. >> >> I'm basing this next point off of watching various clips of sports and >> related injuries shown on late night talk shows (Shawn White's recent face >> plant was a minor scrape, but there was at least one X-Games style stunt on >> Letterman that led to a more serious injury, Coco's head going bonk on the >> studio floor), so I may be missing some relevant outlets. I do not recall >> any footage of an athlete being injured that was shown without said person >> (or host, in the case of Conan and his concussion) after they had recovered >> from said injury. And these were events that were intended to be broadcast >> live to tape. This man deserved no less. If the Georgian Olympic Committee >> or other local authorities raise a stink, I won't blame them. >> >> In other words, mainstream media, don't be those police chase video shows. >> > > > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
