The moral implications of public death coverage

[Saikii]

I'd like to discuss some of the things that make it into media and internet coverage that probably shouldn't, because I've just seen a very disturbing thing on youtube: a video of coverage of actual incidents at amusement parks that were deadly.

This made me realize just how much Youtube lets slip through the cracks everyday. I believe actual people's deaths should never be aired publicly or photographed for all to see. These are people's family members, their babies, a father, a sister, a brother, a mother, maybe... );

It's one thing when gore is in a fictional series. That's not real. Actual death videos are of actual people that were living and over the course of the video tragically died.

How do those families feel knowing that their loved ones tragic end is there for all to see? It isn't right, but it happens all the time, so much more than we realize.

It begs to question how much media should cover. My classes in college would often talk about this and a time a photo of a family holding their dead son and crying made the paper.

Those poor, poor, people... ): No... Just no... If there are rules for media, I think there should be rules for Youtube and other video services as well about this.

What can we do as people to make sure these are the things Youtube and service providers monitor and delete more of?

Should they be allowed to show things like this?

Where would you draw the line?  

[wolf_with_a_dragon]

I say so long as they have the family's permission, or if there's something to be gained/learned from it go ahead. I also hear a lot that the U.S. has a thing against showing that stuff, but I know that other countries, Mexico for example, shows everything. So, I also believe one's culture should be taken into consideration when deciding whether or not to show something.  

[beaulolais]

please do not do anything to glorify violent death

people can be very suggestible

fortunately personal details here are now being left out of coverage of suicides and even shootings, at least at first.  

[Trinity G.]

I can tell you why death is broadcasted like that- It sells. Simple and easy. This world follows the golden rule - He who has the gold makes the rules. I won't get started in that however.

There are some points where televising death (not the actual moment of, the the fact that there is a deceased) is ok, even necessary, I would argue. I'll use a terrorist group for example. Back a couple years ago, I had never heard of ISIS. Then one day, while standing in line for my food, I saw on a news network a gruesome image of a member holding up a decapitated head. I then learned of possible problems out east, and the danger they brought. That kind of knowledge was brought on by a televised death. It was invaluable, and something that I think is necessary.

Otherwise, just showing death just to show it, or for clickbaits or what have you, is distasteful. Sometimes, a family will show the moment of death as a tribute, or warning to other alive persons. Theres a whole lot of grey matter inbetween, and can be hard to monitor. In a perfect world, distasteful uses of death should be barred, but useful uses of it should be allowed and encouraged.