Airing death on TV

[RealJames]

A few times since I've come to Japan I've seen footage of someone dying, with mosaics on the smallest parts. It isn't in poor taste, but it's still looped a few times.

I forget now, in North America, is actual death footage aired? I can't remember actually seeing it.

The reason I ask is because the JFK head-shot footage was just looped like 6 times in tv here with a tiny mosaic on it, and I felt the same way I do when I see any death footage, I think "... that's a real person, a human, dying.. not a movie or something..." .

It's not just death footage but also like super high res HD zoom-in's of someone's blood all over the road after a car accident or a stabbing or whatever.

These clips seem to bother me, and I can't seem to remember feeling this way in Canada, and I know the States is more sensitive than Canada about these things.

[steven]

Although the US doesn't usually show that kind of footage on purpose, sometimes it happens on live TV. I think it may happen semi-often in California in particular due to the live car chases. I'm not sure, but I think there may have been some kind of law passed after a particularly brutal occurance. I think there is always some kind of delay involved in televised car chases now just-in-case.

I remember one in particular when I was younger-- where a man stole a tank and went on a rampage with it. Here's the article on wikipedia: Shawn Nelson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I remember a few more, but extremely vaguely... I think I remember seeing one where there was a shotgun involved.

[RobinMask]

We actually had a controversy in the UK recently over airing a death on television. The BBC were doing a documentary on euthanasia, I believe, and showed the moment of a man's death as he chose to die. It was all in good taste, I'm told, but there was a large debate about whether it should have been allowed or not. There was another recent controversy about publicising photos of Princess Diana's death, and the more famous one of Bin Laden's body . . .

I guess it seems to me that in the UK, and to an extent the US, that there appears to be certain circumstances or scenarios when it's "acceptable" to show death or a body, but only when justifiable reasons present themselves. I think more so in the UK, but I'm not American, so I can't really say too much about the American way of things.

I can say though that, no matter how graphic or morbid our press can get in its photography and images, I have yet to see anything with blood or gore or 'distressing' shown before the watershed, and even then it's extremely rare that the footage is of real-life and only when there's a 'justifiable' context, such as a documentary.

[Columbine]

Originally Posted by RobinMask

I can say though that, no matter how graphic or morbid our press can get in its photography and images, I have yet to see anything with blood or gore or 'distressing' shown before the watershed, and even then it's extremely rare that the footage is of real-life and only when there's a 'justifiable' context, such as a documentary.

It's certainly better than TV in Nigeria when I was a baby. My mum had to sit with my older sister when she was watching Sesame Street with her finger on the off button, just in case they decided to air a live execution by firing squad.

[WingsToDiscovery]

In America, instead of a mosaic they cover up the death damage with a McDonald's logo, and then they proceed to cut to 20 minutes of commercials of crap you don't need. Amongst those commercials includes promos for UFC and shows like CSI, ironically followed by a news report on how it's video games that make kids violent. And it's all done in a hard rock raspy voice.

[evanny]

this reminds me when my friend showed me for the first time web page rotten.com
weak-belly people should not visit it.

however i also can't deny my human curiosity to see some blood or bodies. it is natural. like if there was a car crash - why people all stair in a circle. partly because maybe they are worried but most want to see smashed cars and bodies.

i know tv here doesn't show real deaths as far as i know. maybe it is for the best but on the other hand happy-flower-non-violence tv may detach some people from reality. because bloody murders, crashes etc are part of this reality...still, those who want to see them have the internet.

[RealJames]

Here's my take on some of this, and why it surprises me.

Since I was a kid I've seen heaps of sex scenes in Hollywood movies and the like, and part of me always knew it was fake no matter how realistic it was. The first times I saw sex in these Hollywood movies I was really into it but not too long after I got desensitized to it and it did very little to me.
Then I saw porn for the first time, as it turned out I was NOT desensitized to sex at all! And then after a lot more porn, I actually DID get desensitized to sex lol, enough so that when I first had sex in my mind it wasn't quite real, more like a porno movie, but then after a few days it was like "holy shit it really did happen!"

Parallel that for violence, I've seen more than enough violence in movies and video games and it certainly doesn't have much of an effect on me. But when I see something which I know is real, on tv or on the internet or actually in real life, I get an honest visceral reaction, in other words I'm so NOT desensitized to it.

What I'm getting at is that we know the difference between the fake, despite being ultra realistic, footage and the real, despite being slightly censored, footage.

My concern, if we see too much of the real stuff....

[evanny]

of course people can tell the difference from movies and real life.
however i think when showing death on tv it makes people also care a little more.
for example. i didn't care about 9/11 in terms of tragedy, specially seeing aftermath with 3 wars. however seeing pictures of people falling 50 stories to their death did stir up some emotions and a realization of the scale of the tragedy.

if people only heard - 10 people shot in cold blood - they would most likely not think much of that. it is simply acknowledgement of a fact that 10 have been shot. however if they were to see bodies it would call out emotions and with that some kind of change. maybe in society, maybe in individuals life. maybe it will make some people to take action to help those affected by the tragedy.

so i am for death on tv. because hearing simple numbers - 200 000 killed by a tsunami - can't make as big as an impact as seeing just 2 dead.

don't know if english have, but we have a saying that goes like this:
"better to see once rather than to hear a thousand times"

[ICHIBANinLA]

In Los Angeles we get alot of coverage of live high speed car chases which ends in death sometimes due to the suspect losing control of the car or giving up and commiting suicide.Also on Spanish news shows very graphic death videos from across the globe.Unedited most most times.

[Heather]

I'm not a fan of the News, what they air isn't news to me. I just smh in shame as another man gets eaten by the media and his life ruined... for example Anthony Weiner. Casey Anthony. Accusing Marilyn Manson of causing a school shooting. etc.
The fact that they air a person's face who had died, or even put the spotlight to a rapist for several days in a row, dissapoints me. I'm fine with reading the paper, that's plenty enough. But I guess we live in a time where we're too lazy to read. Almost every kid says they hate reading, but why?