GUARDIANS OR BABYSITTERS?

Matt Birt

mb499511@ohio.edu

Many people are of the opinion that a journalist has a very important job when it comes to informing the public about news and data.  They believe journalists should have high moral standards, present themselves as professionals, and ensure the best interests of the public are kept in mind.  Sometimes, it’s said the public should not be shown images or told specific pieces of information because it’s too graphic, too controversial or too dangerous.  Most people believe that it is the journalists’ job to make sure they understand the fine line between what the public should know and what the public can’t know.  This is hogwash.  People demand to know the truth about what is going on in the world, yet they scold and scorn when the truth, however ugly it may be, is revealed.  The people who accurately inform the masses about falsified or embellished events should be commended, because what the public can and cannot accept or handle should not be up for question.

The popular belief when the media decides not to share something is that it is too brutal or too scary for people to witness.  Such is the case with videotaped deaths that often come out of the Middle East.  Terrorists organizations, religious groups, even everyday citizens are killing people that are different from them because they believe they are dangerous or evil, and they are recording the incidents.  ISIS recently released videos of the beheadings of western journalists, and news stations collectively decided that the content in the tape was far too disturbing to show, so they either omitted it altogether from their broadcasts, or only took segments from it to display.  While I believe the images are upsetting, news stations should not have to censor themselves because it would upset viewers.  If viewers don’t think they can handle the content, have them look away or change channels.  TBS runs sitcoms at the same time most news stations air their nightly broadcasts.  Personally, watching Seinfeld is much more preferable to ingesting more depressing news.

While news outlets may try and prevent the public from seeing a graphic murder or crime occur, sometimes a media cover-up occurs under murkier circumstances.  If a story is set to be released that puts a person or company in bad light and they have the power to flex some muscle to try and keep the story from leaking, they will.  It happens all the time.  The dairy industry does it.  Politicians do it.  Organized religion does it, and when peoplespeak out about it happening, they are harassed and grilled.

Maybe what we are seeing is a combination of citizens who have been ultra-sensitized by censorship across multiple media fronts and a slew of sullied corporations and personal brands that try and maintain a reputable image, but when doors are closed and backs are turned, commit unsavory acts they just hope the public never catches wind about.

(YouTube) "The Freaking FCC" - Family Guy

Instead of holding journalists to the fire when they try and reveal big stories to the public, the public should hold a mirror to themselves.  They are the ones who demand truth, honesty and cooperation from journalists, so when a journalist follows through on that vow and delivers a nasty report, maybe they should force themselves to watch, to understand, and to react in a more informed manner.