TV News and Disasters

auerillo

As the TV stations of the world go into panic overdrive to rush to haiti and compete to compete with each other to bring us all the most harrowing and gruesome pictures and stories, am I alone in finding it all a little distasteful. Actually, quite a lot distasteful.

How can camera men and journalists etc stand by filming when their fellow humans lie dying and injured around them?

Fajitas!

Because they have to report the story as it is. As soon as they were to get involved, it becomes a biased story.

Dr Galen

i dunno if this thread is totally suited to this forum?

News and Media maybe?

I'll have a think

CDfm

I get your point but we dont emotionally own the world.

Of course what happened in Haiti is a tragedy but getting all emotional over it is a bit odd IMHO.

Princess Di dying and the outpouring of emotional grief would have you believe she was someone of importance.

I do think the media overhype these things.

Just dont warch the news if it bugs ya - I don't as its too little info and repetition.

And in answer to your question -how they do it is because its their job and how they earn a living and they are not Mother Theresa. Mother Theresa was not a cameraman or Newsman.

So I suppose the question for you is could you stay emotionally detached in that sort of environment and the answer is probably not.

I just wonder are you in a job where you can remain detached?

L31mr0d

auerillo wrote: »

How can camera men and journalists etc stand by filming when their fellow humans lie dying and injured around them?

Reminds me of one of my favourite pieces by the Artist Bansky

Pherekydes

Fajitas! wrote: »

Because they have to report the story as it is.

Why? Put your loved ones in a similar situation. Do you take photos or do you ring for the emergency services or lend a hand?

Or

Swap places. Do you smile for the cameras or scream at them to help you?

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

i dunno if this thread is totally suited to this forum?

News and Media maybe?

Humanities, clearly.

CDfm

Pherekydes wrote: »

Humanities, clearly.

tLL FTW:p

but is there a guy angle like about work detachment etc.

humberklog

I can't imagine how the enormity of the famine in Ethopia in '84 would have been conveyed if Michael Burke had been getting stuck in helping people out on the ground as opposed to spreading the message to a wider international public by doing his job (which is recording and reposting events).

Nervous Wreck

Pherekydes wrote: »

Humanities, clearly.

Agreed.

CDfm

humberklog wrote: »

I can't imagine how the enormity of the famine in Ethopia in '84 would have been conveyed if Michael Burke had been getting stuck in helping people out on the ground as opposed to spreading the message to a wider international public by doing his job (which is recording and reposting events).

Agreed - and you have to be a strong person to do that too.

Take a fireman or an ambulance driver - it would not do to be squeemish.

Was it Alice Cooper who said on the Parental Advisory lyrics campaign - that lyrics were tame just switch on Sky or CNN if you want to be disgusted.

I think at this stage I am no longer horrified at it. They could show executions on telly and I imagine after a few I would be immune.

humberklog

CDfm wrote: »

I think at this stage I am no longer horrified at it. They could show executions on telly and I imagine after a few I would be immune.

Oddly enough on one project I worked on a couple of year ago I came across a chap that, for all I could see, constantly watched beheadings on line. Peculiar chap.

To the OP: I'm curious as to why you think that this topic is relevant to this forum. I'm sure you have a resaon but I'm buggered if I can figure it out.
Also you don't commit to what you think a cameraman and reporters role should be if confronted with such problem as being in...let's say an earthquake scenario?

Who's to say that individuals in the media don't get stuck in in their time off? Mind you if I owned a TV network I wouldn't let them as the risks to them being injured (as they may not have any formal training for such matters) is very high. Therefore endangering the next broadcast's chances of coming together as they could be stuck in hospital.

Who's to say that what they'd do would be helpful? There were a lot of deaths of concentration camp victims after the war because they were over fed by Russians that thought they were doing the right thing.

Who's to say they wouldn't exacerbate the situation by simply getting in the way, misinterpretting translations or cross contaminating the area and all the while when being such a nuisance they're missing their given objective of spreading the information globally? A very important job too.

Tell you what I think: it's grown up people doing grown up work in a grown up corporation for a grown up world. It's how we've evovled so successfully as a species by putting the right people doing what their good at in the right place. Grown ups doing grown up stuff.

OSiriS

Pherekydes wrote: »

Why? Put your loved ones in a similar situation. Do you take photos or do you ring for the emergency services or lend a hand?

In your analogy, the news teams are doing the equivalent of ringing the emergency services. Do you think the relief efforts and charitable donations would be even close to what we are seeing if the media didn't make such efforts in bringing the disaster to public attention. What would be better, a few hundred untrained reporters giving disaster relief, or the tens of thousands of aid workers and volunteers who travelled to assist. Besides, who's to say the media crews aren't helping when they aren't filming and preparing for their pieces?

Fajitas!

Pherekydes wrote: »

Why? Put your loved ones in a similar situation. Do you take photos or do you ring for the emergency services or lend a hand?

Or

Swap places. Do you smile for the cameras or scream at them to help you?



Humanities, clearly.

A) My own loved ones in trouble, I help and ring emergency services.

Neither, I help myself and my loved ones.

If reporters helped instead of reporting, they'd be volunteers and not reporters, it's their job. No, it's not always easy, being involved in an emergency/crisis/war, it's never going to be easy but at the end of the day, they're being hired to report back with facts. Let them do what they want off camera and not working.

If a reporter started reporting while aiding the people, etc, they'd automatically have taken a stance, they're no longer an unbiased source of information. Some news channels are bad enough with the facts and overhype already.

Dr Galen

i'm in agreement with those who question if this is the right forum for this thread. I'm failing to see where this is related to tGC. Humanities does appear to be a possible home for it although on reading the charter there I can see possible issues with the OP and the subsequent posts.

Therefore, I'm going to close this thread, and say to the OP, if you would like this issue explored further, try the Humanities forum, though I would suggest that you have a read of the charter first, and re-write your opening post as you see fit.

Cheers

MM