Here is a great BBC documentary about the coverage of the Iraq war. The documentary points out the absence of bloodshed and carnage when the war is reported on in the UK and America. Parts are violent and very disturbing, but it makes a fundamentally sound point. When media censors pictures of violence and gore from their reporting they work to further their governments cause of supporting the war. By not allowing scenes of unjustifiable destruction to be shown, the media pushes the bloody realty of war out of the public's view. While this documentary focuses on Britain’s news coverage, the root of the problem from the American side is likely our for-profit media that puts a premium on profitability as opposed to actual news. When news editors have the choice to shock and horrify people with the truth of Iraq, they realize that people don't want to see it. In TV land want translates directly into ratings, which translate directly into money. By creating the advantage for watchable news over informative news, commercial media blinds us to the suffering war causes and is complicate to its continuation.
1 comment:
There is an interesting dichotomy here because it seems like the public does have an appetite for violence and conflict, just not for the graphic displays of blood and gore that often accompany it.
Some examples of this can be seen when the news comes on. When a bank robbery or neighborhood shooting occurs, every reporter wants to be first on the scene with pictures, but those pictures are always sanitized for the viewing public. Car chases are another example. Helicopters follow the suspects from overhead reporting live like it's a NASCAR race, then immediately zoom out if there is an accident or cut to the studio shot if there are, again, graphic displays of blood and carnage.
This, one might argue, feeds into a sort of false reality, where intense situations and crisis' can be observed from afar and without consideration of any consequences. Without having to deal with the sometimes inconvenient after effects of death and bodily harm the public is free to intoxicate itself on the "gripping drama" of shootouts, car chases, bank robberies, and yes, even war.
To your point, this is likely a result of "for profit" news organizations that satiate the public desire to view conflict without accountability. The truth seems much easier to stomach when it is presented without the complement of a visual reality. Perhaps if we started seeing more of the latter, we'd be able to better appreciate the horror of the former.
Post a Comment