1. ← previous post: Marilyn Manson to Play Jesus Christ in New Movie
  2. → next post: “No Gas Day” Probably a Bust

MSNBC Asks: Should Press Self-Censor Disturbing News?

Filed under “Media,” “Culture,” and “Politics”
by Adam at 4:26 PM on May 12, 2004

2 Comments

MSNBC’s “Question of the Day” today is, “Should the U.S. media not show graphic acts of terrorism-like the Nick Berg beheading?”

I voted against this kind of self-censoring, and I strongly would encourage anyone else interested in the health of American democracy to do the same. I used the available feedback form for the survey to send in the following response:

As Americans, we have the privilege of living in a country where the public helps shape government policy and action. As such, the public has both a right and a responsibility to know the truth about what our government is doing and about what is happening to our soldiers and civilians overseas. We have are guaranteed a free press in the Constitution in part so that the public can enjoy this right and fulfill this responsibility. It is the duty of the media to report the news, no matter how gruesome or unpleasant.

Disturbingly, 54% of those responding to this poll seem to disagree with me. If you read this before the survey closes tonight, and if you feel like I do, please visit and voice your opinion against media self-censorship. As the late federal judge Murray Gurfein wrote in his opinion on United States v. New York Times (1971) regarding publication of the Pentagon Papers, “The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the values of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know.”

Adam is a web developer and graphic designer who lives and works in south-central Kansas. He likes to speak his mind, both here and in his business blog. He only rarely writes about himself in the third person, honest. If you’d like to work with Adam, drop him a line.

2 Comments »

  1. The results are in, and — as with so much of American opinion these days — it was an almost 50/50 split on this question.

    Part of the “Question of the Day” e-mail message that I get each day is a sampling of participants’ feedback on the poll. Here’s what folks had to say:

    Yesterday, we asked you “Should the U.S. media not show graphic acts of terrorism–like the Nick Berg beheading?” Over 200,000 of you voted, and 53 percent of you said “Yes. The media SHOULD NOT show graphic acts of terrorism.”

    Here’s what some of you said:

    “Obviously our military and government officials can’t be honest about what is happening in Iraq so if we are to gain any knowledge at all we must endure the pictures and footage the Iraqi’s add to propaganda machine the Bush administration has provided.” Michelle Smith, Monroe, NC

    “I think it’s a great question. I watched the beheading and I sure wish I didn’t, but it wakes you up inside, and makes you think about what is going on in our world, and it isn’t right. Things need to change in the government and innocent people shouldn’t be dying. I feel 50/50 of graphic stuff should be showed. It shows people that this is really happening in today’s world, and it should be treated with the greatest respect.” -Angela, Castlegar BC

    “I think people have a right to know what goes on but as far as graphic pictures.. Where is the respect for this person’s families that have to see this? They’ll worry even more about their sons, daughters, husbands, etc over there.” - Mother of a soldier, Indiana

    Comment by Adam — May 13, 2004 @ 11:50 am

  2. While I do believe we need a free and unhampered press, I am appalled by the grusome, peepshow that is often dignified as journalism. A cantankerous, obstinate press is one thing, but much of what I see is voyeristic enterainment posing as serious journalism. All too often we see unnecessary details like the beheading, or lingering display of a gastly outrage (over and over), or fast breaking details of infamous trials. But no reporting is done on the problems and plight of the working poor in this country. Issues like lack of health care and housing are apparently not sexy enough for prime time reporters. Where are the true reporters like Murrow now when we need them?

    Comment by Kate Flynn — August 4, 2005 @ 10:00 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post ::

Say something, already

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Your e-mail address will never be published publicly unless you put it in your comment (and then I’d probably edit it out).

Please read my comment policy if this is your first time commenting here.

Required fields marked with *

*

* (never published)

Quicktags: