The Whole Truth and Nothing But The Truth

Barbara Harring - bh572115@ohio.edu

“Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?” We recognize these words as sworn testimony made before entering the witness stand in a court of law. These are just words, yet they hold so much value and seriousness when used in this way. Why? The truth is sacred and good, yet it can be harmful. The truth can save someone’s life the same way that it can destroy it.

Media professionals must consider the impact of displaying graphic or extreme content that could alter a person’s state of mind. When you unexpectedly see a disturbing image, you can’t un-see it. If it affects you enough, every time you close your eyes you might see that image. It can be especially disturbing for those who are closely associated with the content, like those who live nearby, those who know the victims, or those who have a strong emotional affiliation to the tragedy.

There are graphic images that need to be seen for the truth to be told. So, let's use good judgment when presenting the truth. Does a violent scene need to appear on the front page or cover? We can still publish an unaltered image on page 2 or 3 with an appropriate warning for graphic content. Rather than shading or eliminating details from the truth with a photo or video that is altered, the media can choose to satisfy the requirements of ethical conduct while serving the public and protecting the vulnerable.

An example that stands out to me is the coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing in April 2013. The New York Daily News decided that the photo they selected to publish may be too graphic for victims and their families, so they acted out of sensitivity to these viewers. They altered the image by removing the open gash on one victim’s leg and placed the still-gory image on their front page, where victim’s families see their loved ones surrounded by blood and destruction. The altered image is below. The actual image of the victim's leg in the upper left corner can be viewed on the New York Intelligencer web page.

Photo from nymag.com - New York Intelligencer April17, 2013

The Atlantic included a photo on their website of another Boston Marathon bombing victim with both feet blown off. This is an image that should not be published without a warning and a hard stop before the image appears, which is what they did. There is a warning that includes an icon the viewer needs to click before seeing the actual image. Image number 8 is very graphic. Please consider the warning before viewing it. 

There was a choice to make. The Daily News image was less gruesome than The Atlantic photo, but they altered it. They made the wrong choice. The Atlantic, I believe, made the right choice. It is more honest to provide a clear warning and the actual image as The Atlantic did rather than crop, alter, the image like most did. If you decide to publish a graphic, blood-filled scene, do so with appropriate protection in place without alternation. Otherwise, do not publish at all.

I believe that there are ways to serve the public by promoting the truth, yet protecting the vulnerable. Until news professionals focus less on shocking the public with front page gore, less on being first for financial gain, and more on being advocates for the public, the current trend of fabricating information is not likely to change.