Televising Footage of Shootings Does More

Harm than Good

Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, 2016
From Opposing Viewpoints in Context

“It was Flanagan, not the crime’s survivors or victims’ loved ones, who wanted the images
televised.”

Jeet Heer is an author and senior editor at the New Republic. In the following viewpoint, he argues that
the media should refrain from showing videos and images of recorded murders. Referring to a video of
the fatal shooting of two journalists by their ex-coworker in Virginia, Heer contends that showing such
footage is disrespectful, is harmful to the victims’ loved ones, and in the case of the Virginia shooting,
provides the deceased shooter with the exposure he had hoped for. While others assert that the video
highlights the need for stricter gun control laws, Heer believes that anyone who watches the footage
will simply see it through the lens of their political views. Though graphic videos may always be
available on certain parts of the Internet, Heer urges his colleagues to abstain from participating in
their circulation.

As you read, consider the following questions:

1. In the author’s opinion, why is it important to distribute footage of war crimes and
policeinvolved shootings? How do the circumstances of these events differ from those
surrounding the Virginia murders?

2. Imagine a circumstance in which a fellow member of the media disagrees with Heer’s point
of view. How would the journalist support his or her argument?
3. According to Heer, videos of violent events will never truly disappear from the Internet. Do
you believe people should have the right to post and access this type of video? Why or why
not?

Vester Flanagan seems to have been proud of the fact that he recorded his murder of television
journalists Alison Parker and Adam Ward in Virginia [on August 26, 2015]. “I filmed the shooting,” he
tweeted earlier today, then posted two videos as proof. Aside from Flanagan’s own recording, the
killings took place during a live broadcast. Since the videos of Parker and Ward being shot exist, the
event is now not just a crime but also a story about the rules of media coverage. Should news outlets
show the videos? Should news consumers seek out the videos? Or should we respect the victims by
refusing to be voyeurs in their murder? These are questions all media outlets struggle with. To wit:
CNN was initially showing the video, but changed its policy.

The taboo against circulating images of actual murders is a strong one, and for good reason: Showing
and viewing such images is disrespectful of the dead and also painful to their loved ones. The moment
of death, especially if it comes about in the terrifying form of murder, is deeply traumatic. To show
images of someone dying without their permission is comparable to desecrating their remains, doing to
the dead what they wouldn’t have wanted in life. And for survivors, to see images of the late beloved
being killed is a reinforcement of the pain. This taboo is worth preserving even though there are
exceptions that should be carved, such as when the narrative of the crime is disputed.

This is especially true in cases involving the police, like the killing of Walter Scott in North Charleston,
South Carolina, earlier this year. Since acts of alleged police brutality are often contested, and
because there is a long history of police distorting facts to conceal culpability, it makes sense to air
video evidence when it can help untangle the factual debate. This explains why loved ones and
survivors often want these videos released and circulated. But in the case of Wednesday’s killings in
Virginia, there is no factual dispute about what happened, so circulating the video is superfluous and
cruel. It was Flanagan, not the crime’s survivors or victims’ loved ones, who wanted the images
televised.

What’s true of acts of police violence also applies more broadly to war crimes, which are often denied
or minimized. It makes sense to circulate images of the Holocaust, of the massacres in the former
Yugoslavia, and of the tortures of Iraqis at Abu Ghraib in order to counter the tendency either to
pretend these events didn’t happen or to whitewash the extent of the horror.

Finally, there is a political argument being made that showing the Virginia shooting is necessary to
force America to confront the need for gun control.

Show the nation the crime scene photos of Sandy Hook. Plaster them on television wall to
wall. Make America see what they tolerate.—[Twitter user] kstreethipster

The problem with this argument is that while videos can help clarify factual issues of what happened,
they never have clear political meaning. We watch such videos in the context of our political views. An
NRA supporter could watch a video of the Virginia shooting and conclude that TV journalists need to
be armed. And the fear of violent crime, which could be heightened by such videos, is as likely to
inspire people to buy a gun than to support gun control.

Could showing the Virginia video help de-glamorize guns? Perhaps, but it could just as easily make
those enthralled by gun culture put even more faith in weapons (the video filmed by Flanagan, with his
handgun in the foreground, bears an eerie resemblance to first-person-shooter video games). The
unlikely possibility that showing the video could promote gun control is no reason to make an
exception to the taboo against showing scenes of real murders.

Of course, in the internet age, it’s impossible to fully banish such images. They will always find a home
in sites like Reddit. But we can at least prevent them from circulating more widely on mainstream
media, to minimize the damage done and especially to make sure survivors don’t have to see these
images unless they want to.

Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2018 Gale, a Cengage Company.

Source Citation
Heer, Jeet. "Televising Footage of Shootings Does More Harm than Good." Opposing Viewpoints
Online Collection, Gale, 2018. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http://li
nk.galegroup.com/apps/doc/DXLYSO661297213/OVIC?u=cuny_ccny&xid=2ae40
7ed. Accessed 28 Feb. 2018. Originally published as "Don’t Circulate Videos of
the TV News Killing in Virginia," New Republic, 26 Aug. 2015.