After the recent mass shooting at a mall outside Dallas, Texas, video and pictures were circulating on social media that showed bodies lying on the ground, torn apart. This has renewed debate about whether the press should share such graphic images of violence.
LISTEN:
Some people argue that by showing these images people may be more likely to support gun control measures.
Others argue that showing graphic images of violence can be harmful, both to the victims and to the public. They worry that these images can needlessly traumatize viewers or desensitize them to violence.
Michael Griffin, a media and cultural studies professor at Macalester College in Minnesota, isn’t convinced that showing graphic images will have much impact on public opinion. He believes that whether the media publishes the images or not, people will continue to have access to them through other means.
"I'm pretty skeptical that any particular image or video clip in and of itself will have much impact on public opinion," Griffin says. "I don't think just the emotional appeal of an image by itself would make too much difference."
Dave Lopez, a retired KCBS-2/KCAL-9 reporter of 48 years, and author, believes there is no value in showing bodies "blown to bits," but he does think media outlets “have to show just enough to know what the crime is and what has happened without disrespecting the loved ones."
Griffin agrees with Lopez that the media should be careful about how they use graphic images. He believes that the context in which the images are presented is more important than the images themselves.
"It's not so much what the image is of but how it is used by the media," Griffin says. "How is it contextualized? What else is it presented with? What kinds of text and captions accompany it? All those things, I think, are the crucial factors that really make a difference."
Follow KNX News 97.1 FM
Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | TikTok
Related
Related
