Standards for the News
Privately, I have received questions about my trashed post…” What was it?” or “Why did I do that?” I explained about the coverage of the death of the Georgian Luger Nodar Kumaritashvili and how I felt anger towards the station(s) that aired the images of his crash. My post was reflective of that and was originally titled Shame on CTV.
I had spoke with CTV back East and in Vancouver, expressing my disgust right after it was aired. I was informed by one station that due to an overwhelming amount of calls and emails from the public it was going to be removed, but it continued. The Vancouver CTV station apparently still felt it was “news worthy.” They don’t want to censor their news.
I had thought about it so much, I felt that by venting the way I did on my post I would be forever reminded of the image. What I have learned is that taking away my own post was not going to help me process my feelings nor protect anyone from remembering the sadness of the event. From people I trust very much I received the message loud and clear… I don’t need to shield anyone, including myself, from what I feel. It was my authentic voice.
So, this is what I want to say as the talk lingers about the tragic loss of life on opening day, the lack of compassion and forethought shown by the media and the subsequent arguments brewing on the safety of the track itself.
On such a beautiful day where millions of people tuned in to celebrate the Olympics; to see people they know or admire, to be apart of history in the making whether near or far, to commit into memory or be there in person we relied on the media to make a choice as to what was important for the public to see. That day they made a bad choice!
There has to be standards, some respect and common sense applied to the news and indeed the media at large when covering what is clearly a horrific accident. It did not take me a second to realize this poor young man was dead or at the very least severely injured. It did not happen in front of our eyes so that the cameras could not cut away fast enough, they had time to assess its “worthiness.” In the end, there was no need to share it with the world in the way they did.
What is the public right to know? How far does the media need to take a story in order for us to be properly informed? At what point do we say, “enough!” This doesn’t fall under the statement “if you don’t like it change the channel,” I wasn’t given that opportunity. This wasn’t some stupid TV show or movie where we see hundreds of images of fake death every half hour, this was real. Maybe, that is it. Maybe because we so much fake death, the news team thinks we are so desensitized, we can handle the real thing. Well, I’m not.
I have seen death up close and its not pretty. I make an effort to shield myself from over-exposure to such imagery because I don’t want to have file after file in my head of such dark human experiences…real or imagined. The news media needs to police itself better and truly answer “what is the justification?”
Find a better way to break a story rather than relying on shock value. In fact, value the viewers more, the family of that young man and protect any integrity left of the station itself. Some things do need to be censored, we don’t need to see everything all of the time. There are things in life that are far too disturbing and hurtful which serve no purpose when they are shown to an unsuspecting audience. The media has to recognize this fact and act accordingly.
Now, as they open up whether the track itself was designed poorly, we are sure to see a media frenzy of speculation and blame. We lose site of the loss of life, the viewers are deflected to another drama and therefore maybe there is some thought that we will forget their role in exploiting this tragedy.
I thank those who made me realize that I can’t escape just by deleting a post, I was upset about the coverage, I felt terrible for the family and I felt frustrated upon calling the stations. It was great to hear so many viewers were equally disgusted and that gives me great hope. Taking the time to make our feelings known is the only way to ensure this happens, shall I say, less frequently as I know that our culture may not allow for the shock and horror news to truly bite the dust. I ask that we all hold the stations accountable, we are not unfeeling viewers. For CTV viewers Vancouver, contact 604.608.2868.
Posted in 
It takes courage to just write how one feels. Good for you, my friend
Jennifer has written a great piece on brave female reporters called Reporting From The Edge
http://timefindersmagazine.com/selffamily/worldly/252-reporting-from-the-edge
Thank you. It helps when I have the support of people such as yourself.
Jennifer, I could not believe the grotesque choice to air the last moments of a person’s life for the world to witness. It was like a rape of the soul, all of our souls to have the right to die without silence.
You know where I was when I saw the images? On the treadmill! Yes, I almost fell off as my jaw dropped, my heart sank, I gasped for air.
I told my husband that evening that I had seen these images posted on TV. He couldn’t believe it. But then I said that I thought Andy Warhol might have helped justify such pictures. You know his silkscreens of car crashes and a man impaled on a pole? He made multiples of these images, throwing them in our faces and desensitizing us (or bringing to light the fact that we were already on the path towards non-feeling?).
I guess he knew, and so do you and I, that the eye is the window to the soul.
Times, sensitivities and people obviously change.
When such scenes are shown on personal T.V…we have the option of clicking the off button.
I well recall while working late one night in California,glancing up and seeing a TV monitor, recording in real time, the shooting of Robert Kennedy as he walked through a hotel kitchen and faced the bullets from Sirhan Sirhan.
Yes the shooting was shown as well as the scene of him lying on the floor afterwards….
Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald and President Kennedy being shot in his Dallas motorcade. (Jackie incidently,refused to change her blood spattered dress for the swearing in of the vice President Lyndon Johnson.) All shown on TV many times.
When it comes to the Olympics and especially LUGE events, where fragile human frames are exposed to intense G forces and speeds of up to 130, I have to wonder why we want to watch that, or build such extreme tracks…There are enormous risks of death and injury to the contestants.
We know that…yet we watch.
Have we evolved beyond the people who watched public executions or gladiaters in Roman Forums? I think not.
Do we want censorship of news. Or would a public warning before such things are shown…Hard to do with live coverage.
Do we want to return to the days of Mary Whitehouse and her “public morality” censorship campaigns against the BBC? I certainly do not.
Speaking from the land of, “uncountable numbers CCTV monitors”, and ANPR…, personally I wish that peop-le would just personally monitor themselves and what events they go to or watch on their screens, instead.
On one final note, does anyone remember the iconic photographer taken by a war photographer, of a little girl running crying down a Vietnman road, after a Napalm attack, (with her clothes barely adhering to her body? (Napalm use was curtailed shortly after that photo hit the worlds presses!.)
Lydia, thank you for your addition to this post.
We do remember where we were when we see these images; freezing the frame internally as we attempt to decipher the meaning. There are times when we are given ample warning and times such as this when we are not.
What is the true cost of desensitization? What happens to us if nothing surprises or scares us, when it takes more and more to get a rise…a pulse. Will art be as powerful or television as riveting if the boundaries get pushed so far or like you said, towards non-feeling?
“The eye is the window of the soul”, how beautifully stated and so true. If the soul could carry on long after our bodies fade away, would we protect it better?
Yes, you are right Pat, times have changed.
In this particular case, the luge event had not started yet. Not even televised, as it was a practise run. It was given as news, in the middle of celebratory chatter. The next thing that happened… viewers we were being told of an accident that had occurred earlier, a cut to the scene of the luger and then we watched his crash. A decision was made to air something that was not previously even on the air. Totally could have been edited to take out the actual death but they did not do that. That is what upset the public. It was not live coverage but a call made to show his death/crash afterward.
Don’t know who Mary Whitehouse is but most “public morality” types are usually coming from some religious side, which I clearly have no affiliation with. I come from common sense, compassion and from the perspective Lydia commented on, what path are we on and what does it do to our soul?
As to CCTV etc., I have no problem with some street monitors. If it helps catch some robbers, keeps a street safer, maybe helps somebody catch a child abductor, profiles a potential threat, I don’t care. I have nothing to worry about as as law abiding citizen, so who cares who is watching? The fact is there are people who can’t monitor themselves and are walking targets or running criminals. As long as I’m consulted along with my fellow citizens before implementation, I think that is important to consider.
There is no doubt the photo you are speaking of was heart-stopping, but did we receive that photo without proper warning while watching a celebration? NO. Did it make a difference, possibly, but it was the backdrop of war.
We learned nothing from seeing this young man die, this track was used in Calgary, it is a sport and many have been on that track successfully. The skill level needs to be high and that is what competition demands. That day the world was being treated to an opening ceremony torch run celebration. The choice to air or not to air a young man’s death in motion, that is the question?
Thanks for your comment and a great historical perspective to add to this post.
Thank you for adding the context of the TV showing.
The news coverage and photos of the young man’s death and the subsequent film of his open casket funeral were shown in Europe, on most news channels.
But there was no commentary regarding Canadian outrage of the repeated showings.
Modern day aspirations and socio/economic “goal posts” for media, ( reflected in significant numbers of the buying/viewing public),… are commonly… viewing numbers, sales, trim bodies, sex, creating & defining an enemy to fight & defying death and aging.
While the order of these priorities may change, but those subjects have most often set the agenda, during the past two decades.
On the subject of CCTV? According to a “man in the know” it is not quite the crime solving solution that was anticipated.
This August 2009 Daily Telegraph story link explains.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6082530/1000-CCTV-cameras-to-solve-just-one-crime-Met-Police-admits-html
The Vancouver 2010 track differs significantly from the Calgary LUGE track.
The 2010 track is much narrower than either the Olympic tracks used in Salt Lake City and Calgary’s one. Mistakes? Not much leeway for correction.
The reported desired outcome of the Vancouver track design, was to create “the fastest track in the world”, & one that could be used later for commercial purposes.
The long, narrow, sharp curved track produced PRACTICE run speeds of over 140k per hour…creating an incredible load and strain on young bodies, protected only by a safety helmet.
(Sources: Toronto Star, IOC and the Wall Street Journal)
Just wanted to back up your sentiment because when the CTV anchor prefaced that last-moment clip with ‘we believe it necessary to the story’..I remember tensing up and the fleeting thought crossing my mind: ‘they can’t possibly be going to show that athlete’s actual death to us all —’ and then the horror of exactly that appearing before my eyes..before I even had a split second to even consider that maybe I should turn the tv off or change channel before it was too late to avoid that image imprint in my brain. I was angry that there hadn’t been even a ‘the following scene may be inappropriate for some viewers’ warning…nothing. I didn’t believe the media would be so irresponsible and my disbelief cost me that thought processing time required to quickly look away. I then remember my first enraged thought following was ‘..HOW THE HELL WAS THAT NECESSARY TO THE STORY??????
Thanks for the additional information, I have heard that the British media is covering this event much differently and more negatively. I’m sure our reaction to the coverage of the death was far down their list.
It shows too, that depending on what you read and who you listen to there are varying opinions. In listening to our sports news director for a local news station he seemed to feel the degree of difficulty is what separates the athletes and mentioned the Calgary track. Yesterday it was also mentioned that Germany had a track that was far more intense than this….so, I guess the debate will continue. Suffice to say, if they love the sport they’ll stay in it, if they are fearful about where it is going or the difficulty involved they will move on.
Either way, the only thing that matters to me is that in the future the media shows a little more compassion.
Thank you Gillean for your support and comment re: this issue. How you responded was a mirror image to my experience. It astounds me that they were unable to see how completely inappropriate, unnecessary and insensitive this was. It was too late, they have permanently changed the way I view the event and you are right our protection from and processing time to look away was not considered.
For all the people that contacted the station across the country, which I heard directly from CTV staff was overwhelming, I applaud you!