Irish Independent website showing "sickening images"

baltimore sun

ah man, I cannot believe that a newspaper showed images from a warzone, what were they thinking, like surely a jedward image or a nice image of paddys in cheltenham woulda be far more suitable.

Dartz

Meh


No worse than the rest of the internet.

Brain Stroking

Not showing pictures like this allows you to get on with your everyday "who will win X-Factor?" existence.
Showing these pictures means people see the horror of what is actually happening.

I propose that pictures like this be fed to us on a daily basis. All of it is real and true so there is no moral issue. If that doesnt cure apathy then nothing will.

As for "respect for the victims" - if i were hogtied and about to be executed i would want the world to see what these guys have done, not have people in the West safely cocooned in their own bubble protected from what has happened.

vicwatson

brimal wrote: »

All this bickering on the thread about paper sales, etc. Are these pictures even going to make the print edition?

Print edition is more selective (and possibly more conservative) in images like this, no?

Correct, it didn't make the front page anyways.

vicwatson

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Not even remotely close to a new low.

IIRC it was the Sunday Independent that had pictures of charred corpses from an IRA bombing on the front cover back in the late 1970's / early 80's. Shocking stuff back then and very close to home.

Were they of children, that had been raped and mutilated and then murdered?

Putting a black marker across their eyes really doesn't matter.

angry kitten

I think that it is important that people see the reality of what is going on in Syria. The real outrage should be with the Syrian government for committing these atrocities and not with a newspaper for highlighting what is going on. I don't think it matters a jot how people feel about it if China and Russia are allowed to continue preventing any meaningful action being taken against Assad and his regime. It doesn't matter how many sanctions are imposed, the real victims of those sanctions are going to be the ordinary citizens.

vicwatson

danniemcq wrote: »

If people are being sickened because they see something in a warzone that distresses them then guess what the photographer and journalist are doing their jobs.

Yes there is a war in Syria at the minute and people know Assad should not be in power but the longer it goes on the more people are desensitised by the whole thing.

While i do not like the independent as a paper i am behind them on this. If this makes you uncomfortable while living in your first world country thats only worry is how much money we have then be very thankful for your sheltered life and be thankful you are not the ones fighting and dying for freedom against a brutal dictator.

Its images like these that keep the debate going, that sway public opinion from "something should be done" to "something has to be done" and maybe that public opinion and pressure can make certain world powers act and show that they can do good and its not all about oil.

They don't have to show dead, raped and mutilated innocent children to stress the point, show armed adults dead if they want but not innocent children.

Son Of A Vidic

This is one of the reasons I sometimes like to watch watch Al Jazeera for news. They do not hold back from showing quite graphic and powerful images at times. In contrast to watching Sky News, BBC News and most western media news channels ect, with their tame, cleansed and sterile reporting. Which is essentially a waste of time since it delivers no impact on the viewer. Al Jazeera will shock you and show you the human cost of war on the ground.

I remember watching RTE News, just as the siege of Homs was starting. They reported that a family was massacred by Syrian troops. During the report they had a still picture of the Homs cityscape in the background. Flicking over to Al Jazeera, when they reported it, they showed 5 little children lying dead alongside their mother.

They mentioned that they had pix-elated the mother's face, because her right eye was gouged out by Syrian troops. Powerful, horrific, disturbing reporting = powerful message delivered. With RTE, I had listened to pointless and meaningless words. On Al Jazeera I had seen the chilling aftermath of human savagery and heard the wails of the mourning. Like it or not, sometimes we just need to be taken out of our comfort zones.

ProudDUB

Brain Stroking wrote: »

Not showing pictures like this allows you to get on with your everyday "who will win X-Factor?" existence.
Showing these pictures means people see the horror of what is actually happening.

I propose that pictures like this be fed to us on a daily basis. All of it is real and true so there is no moral issue. If that doesnt cure apathy then nothing will.

As for "respect for the victims" - if i were hogtied and about to be executed i would want the world to see what these guys have done, not have people in the West safely cocooned in their own bubble protected from what has happened.

Agree 100%

Showing pictures CAN make a difference. Not always, but sometimes. Bob Geldof specifically mentioned seeing news pictures of the famine in Ethiopia for inspiring him to start Band Aid/Live Aid. Would the fundraisers for the earth quake in Haiti have raised as much money if they told us about the devestation, instead of showing us pictures? I don't think so.

Nothingbetter2d

so when is tv3 gonna do a show called "i'm a dictator, get me out of here?"

Glenster

I cant believe you are all discussing these murders, have you no respect for the dead?

The only way we can properly respect these people is by not mentioning that they've been killed. and forgetting them forever.

Biggins

I read some of the posts and I can see both sides of the argument.
Here is food for additional thought though - and I'm NOT standing up for the Independent.

If the picture were not published (they are in a number of publications including The Times (England), some might try claiming "Aaa... sure its all anti-Syrian government propaganda."
...while any opposition might claim if the pictures were left out, its a paper only deciding to show/tell half the story for whatever their agenda is either?

The fact is that such papers and or other forms of media can't win in a lot of these cases.
What the paper should have done - even in its website, was clearer posted that "This report contains shocking pictures with some might not like" - or words to that effect.
Then the reader has options to click onwards in seeing further reality and suffering or only get a possible smaller glimpse of reality in text form only.

...And the effectiveness of a picture really can say a thousand words or more.
Where sometimes text has failed - pictures really can too change peoples perceptions and even history! (EXAMPLE - can be very shocking in some)

Downlinz

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I sometimes like to watch watch Al Jazeera for news. They do not hold back from showing quite graphic and powerful images at times. In contrast to watching Sky News, BBC News and most western media news channels ect, with their tame, cleansed and sterile reporting. Which is essentially a waste of time since it delivers no impact on the viewer. Al Jazeera will shock you and show you the human cost of war on the ground.

I remember watching RTE News, just as the siege of Homs was starting. They reported that a family was massacred by Syrian troops. During the report they had a still picture of the Homs cityscape in the background. Flicking over to Al Jazeera, when they reported it, they showed 5 little children lying dead alongside their mother.

They mentioned that they had pix-elated the mother's face, because her right eye was gouged out by Syrian troops. Powerful, horrific, disturbing reporting = powerful message delivered. With RTE, I had listened to pointless and meaningless words. On Al Jazeera I had seen the chilling aftermath of human savagery and heard the wails of the mourning. Like it or not, sometimes we just need to be taken out of our comfort zones.

Ignorance is bliss, the masses want to think they know whats going on in the world. They don't actually want to know whats going on in the world. The sterile reporting loosely describing an unspecific conflict is exactly what the majority want.

TheIrishGrover

War is horrific and bloody. And these pictures are important. What about the pictures around the time of the Vietnam conflict? The girls running from the My Lai massacre, the monk immolating himself in protest, the prisoner being shot in the head. These pictures shook the world. Are you saying they should not have been taken? What about the horrific pictures from Auschwitz and Sorbibor? People have a short memory when it comes to reading facts but images stay with you forever.

Ironically, the sickening thing is, if it was something hip and trendy and ALL OVER THE PLACE like Kony we'd be told "Oh, if you don't look at those pics then you are ignorant, blind and have no heart. EVERYONE should see these"

...... at least until Hollywood/internet hipsters find a trendier cause. It may well bounce back to Syria and we'll all be pointed to these very pictures