Alright, here is blog post number two about the Olympics. You could say I’m slightly obsessed, but today is the last day before the gold medal hockey game and closing ceremonies. However, it is not so much about the Olympics but an event that happened on the day of opening ceremonies that has been bothering me for quiet sometime. The event I’m referring to was the coverage of the Georgian luger, Nodar Kumaritashvili’s death.
I first learned of the athlete’s death at 7pm on the night of the opening ceremonies on the news. The reporter of the story described what had happened and proceeded to show the video with a warning before saying it was quite graphic. When the video was shown, I was completely shocked and felt sick that they had showed the luger’s last moments on national television. After it was initially played, news stations then began showing edited versions that were not so graphic. The video was also removed from YouTube with alternate links which would not load for interested viewers.
The way the death was dealt with on television really disturbed me and I felt compelled to write about it as a blog entry. Media outlets and social media, like YouTube are constantly trying to grab attention by moving, controversial, scary or graphic stories. Publishing or uploading stories and videos of crimes, violence or deaths get people to buy news papers and the view count increase on YouTube. But what are the consequences of this?
Especially in the event of Nodar Kumaritashvili’s death, was it right to show the athlete’s death on national television? It could be argued that the video was intended to show how dangerous the sport really is, but in my opinion, I think airing the video was completely unnecessary. Obviously it is important for the world to be aware of his death and how dangerous the sport really is, but is showing his last moments a way to convey this? In my opinion showing the video showed a lack of compassion for the luger’s friends and family in this tragic and difficult time. The family now has to be faced with these images, as well as dealing with the death of a loved one.
That being said, as much as I feel that showing his death on national television was wrong, it is hard to escape these images as someone always has access to some sort of technology to capture these moments. Whether it’s a professional camera crew or simply from someone’s cell phone, it feels like someone is always watching and recording. That makes it hard to stop these images of tragic moments from appearing on sites like YouTube and even national television. But what is too far? I don’t think these images make me feel anymore compelled to read the story, instead it makes me feel like newspapers have a lack of compassion for other human beings, and simply worried about selling newspapers. How much is too much? And how much does it really add to the way you read or see a story?
video project
14 years ago
I completely agree- it was beyond unnecessary to show the footage of Nodar's death. I doubt his parents wanted the world to have access to videos of their son's death and the attempts at resuscitating him. I can't imagine how they feel.
ReplyDeleteDoes it mean these mainstream outlets assume viewers want to see someone die? Or do viewers demand it? Either way, I refused to watch it out of respect for his family (although caught a few glances through my fingers that were covering my eyes, because of course I was curious). It is also my guess that they wanted to show the high speed he was traveling at or how dangerous the sport can be. This Yahoo sports blog (http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancouver/blog/fourth_place_medal/post/Should-NBC-have-shown-video-of-Nodar-Kumaritashv?urn=oly,219497) discusses the same questions and the author calls it a "sensationalist ratings grab". But he also goes on to make some valid points. This event WAS a significant news event, so it could have been considered bad journalism had they not shown the footage and released its availability for other media outlets to use. But these outlets showed the video multiple times in a row, and slowed it down at certain points so viewers could see the exact point the luger smashed into a pole. This exploitation and editing was irresponsible and sad. News companies should not have exploited the footage as much as they did. And for viewers - who REALLY wants to see someone die??? Although I was curious to see the context in which it happened, it's so bizarre to me that ANYONE truly needed to see that.
Suggestions for news outlets: I would have preferred a bird's eye view of the course with perhaps a pointer at the location at which it happened. Or maybe a simulation of what happened, but definitely not the real footage when dealing with such a private a difficult manner.
While I agree that the coverage in question was less than tasteful, I do still feel that it was necessary.
ReplyDeleteI believe that due to the timing of the accident – it was the day of the opening ceremonies, the point that the tragedy had already been aired live on television, and the fact that other athletes had questioned the safety of the Vancouver sliding track in the past, are all valid justifications for the intense media coverage of the event.
Nonetheless, I do agree that the continuous overly graphic coverage was unnecessary.
However, I believe that news organizations would justify this by saying that they felt pressure to report on the event due to viewer interest. To be fair, the tragedy was the subject of mass curiosity. In fact, that very day it became impossible to surf the web without being bombarded with: blog posts, Twitter updates, Facebook statuses, e-mail news alerts, and a plethora of mainstream news stories on the issue. In the end, I believe that the media felt that it was impossible to ignore a tragedy of such magnitude, even despite its obvious problematic components.
Alexis, I agree with your response. Yes it would have been considered "bad journalism" to not report on the death, but I think it could have been done in a much more tasteful way that did not involve news companies replaying the video over and over again. It did seem like a grab for attention.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you blogophobe that there was so much discussion about how dangerous the track was, that the mass media would have been criticized for not reporting on it at all. It is impossible to ignore such a tragic death and it was a site of mass curiosity, but I truly believe the mass media outlets could have done a more tasteful news story about his death rather than exploiting it for news ratings.
Regardless, I feel as though the public should be informed when a tragic death happens, but I think the news companies should be more compassionate in their portrayal of the news.
I agree, it was totally unnecessary to show that sort of graphic depiction of the events that happened right before the start of the Olympics. Obviously the media has a duty to the public to report on important events like this. But they should also keep in mind their duty to depict them in a respectful manner. Think of the poor family who just lost they’re young son, brother, friend or relative. The media tends to forget that these are real people they are reporting on and that these matters need to be handled more delicately and be sensitive to the people involved. This is possible without exploiting the story and people that were involved in the event just for better ratings.
ReplyDeleteYou raised a good point: people wanted to see it. People after hearing about it searched for the video on you tube and wanted to see it even though they knew the outcome. I think sometimes when we see videos of this nature we distance ourselves from it and think of it as a TV program rather then a real life event. I also think because we are so used to seeing violence in the media that we are desensitized to a lot of it. This is not to say that people weren’t shocked and upset upon hearing this story but in spite of these feelings we still go to look at it for entertainment value ,which seems really sick and twisted. I wonder why we are so interested in watching and re-watching things like this happen, there are tons of shows that show stunt men getting in serious accidents and videos on America’s Funniest Home Video’s and programs of the sort getting seriously injured and it somehow ends up as entertainment and being laughed at totally ignoring the pain and suffering the people in the video’s were in.