to think the ITV news last night was shocking?

[CoralRose]

Or possibly I'm being naive as it's the first time I've watched the 10o'clock news in a long time.

Of course, I don't think we should be sheltered from the horrors of what is happening around the world, and the events itself are truly shocking,

however

surely there could have been explicit warnings before they showed those dreadful pictures last night.

I honestly couldn't sleep.

I'm not sure such graphic images are completely necessary are they?!

I'm talking about the first piece on Syria.

Incredibly sad about Marie Colvin.

But I never watch the tv news, mostly because I'm like the OP. It wasn't a conscious decision to stop watching, but I don't watch much tv anyway, and one day I suddenly realised I hadn't seen tv news for months. (That was several years ago!) I get most of my news either from the radio (Today and PM), the Guardian and the Internet.

The way I feel about it is that I know terrible things are going on in Syria, I know human beings are doing appalling things to each other, but I don't have to watch it. I suppose some people would say I was sheltering myself from reality, but tbh, I don't suppose it makes any difference to people suffering in Syria whether I watch it or not. So I don't. I'd recommend the same to the OP.

Unfortunately the situation in Syria is such that these sort of images should be expected. If you don't want to see such things then stick to online news articles.

I saw those images and horrible as they were, I believe its necessary to show them. TBH I hadn't really paid much attention to the Syria situation until I saw them last night. It made me sit up and take note of the horror of what is happening there.

And what a brave brave woman Marie Colvin was.

Seeing horrific things can make you passionate about changing them for the better.

For example, I recently watched a short film about how in some countries, they extract bile from bears daily to use in Chinese medicines. When I saw the pictures and read the text, I felt physically sick but it made me want to do something about it.

piprabbit makes a good point about the 7/7 coverage.

I don't need to see a picture to believe a news reporter telling me "Ive witnessed..." I certainly would hear "blah, blah, blah" as another poster suggested.

In fact.. I think it's really quite sad that as a nation we need to see such distressing images in order to comprehend the violence that goes on around the world.

What will happen next?

The 11 year old rape victim that's being talked about in another thread had her ordeal filmed. Should that be shown, in order for the public to 'believe' it happened?

Dear Syrians,
Close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and hide under the bed. You may find what is going on in your country disturbing.

Get a sense of perspective OP.

OP I understand your distress but this has been the reality for people living there for months now. Given that, it does seem a bit trite to complain about showing this, although I do agree a warning about graphic images would be appropriate.

hackmum- I am the same. I mentioned in my OP it;s been a while since I've watched the 10o'clock news. I get most of my news from the paper or radio, and somehow I've managed to understand fully the outrageous atrocities that are occurring, without seeing any footage.

Ariel - such a worthwhile contribution

I think people need to see what's happening. It needs to be real not sanitised. Saying that people are dying does not have the same impact as showing it. If you find that upsetting then you need (like hackmum) to watch earlier versions of the news or use radio/print news instead.

I don't have a big issue with a lack of warning myself not in 10 o'clock news. feeling upset/uncomfortable about it is not a bad thing in my mind. Thats how we should feel, not showing the reality so we can feel better isn't something to aspire to IMVHO.

Sorry, I wasn't being flippant. As soon as I saw it on screen I saw what a twat I looked. I was trying to make the point that we are at home in the comfort and safety of our homes and the OP is saying that she doesn't want to see what is going on in the world, that she finds it upsetting. Who warned the Syrians that their own government is going to shell them, bomb them, kill them, murder them? No one. It's horrific. And she is moaning that she has to see it on television.

Understanding its happening and feeling the shock of the reality are different things.

Images can't always be denied as much as words. When I heard about the Tsunami in Thailand I thought it sounded awful but it wasn't until I saw the images that it really hit me as to just how bad it was. For example.

Innocents are dying. That father's daughter is dead. It is what is happening. It is upsetting. We should all be getting much MORE upset, not less. We're too apathetic.

I think Brits need more rage, less whining, more action. We need to see more images, not just regarding Syria, but pretty much everythin. We need to do more to change things rather than hoike up our bras, tut and say "ooh shocking, more tea?"

We need a reality check. (I include myself)

Regarding the rape of an 11year old, the living's identities should be protected they can choose to speak, the dead can only speak from being seen.

So you wouldn't feel upset/uncomfortable reading/listening about it then?

Why did we just accept the reports on 7/7 then? Why no pictures of dead people? The most graphic image then was a lady wearing a burns mask.

"And she is moaning that she has to see it on television."

Have you read the OP? Or is this the problem, people can't read or understand words any more... they need pictures.

BTW I am right to assume that the journalists do obtain full permission from the families for the use of the images?

YANBU, you can feel total and utter sympathy for the father and his dead child without seeing it IMO

Sometimes the image is what's needed to really make people understand.

I've just heard on the radio about Marie Colvin and Remi Ochlik being killed there today. Her report yesterday had her quoted as saying ?I watched a little baby die today. Absolutely horrific...his little tummy just kept heaving until he died. That is happening over and over and over....There is just shells, rockets and tank fire pouring into the civilian areas of this city and it is just unrelenting.? which is evocative enough for me, but some people just won't get it, perhaps not even with the footage. It's heartbreaking, but some things need to be shown as well as described.

I can imaging that poor baby dying, because I've held my own child as she died, but I can't imagine the warfare taking place while it happened and seeing it makes people at least start to get the sense of what it must be like.

This picture of a pony left to die by the roadside was printed in our local newspaper a week or so ago Warning Upsetting Photograph and when I first saw it part of my shock was that the paper had even printed it. But the comment they ran a few pages on was very good, the editor talking about when he was a young reporter and was told that the news that needed reporting the most was the news people didn't want to see. I think he's right. That image upset me very much but people needed to see what had been done to that poor animal. Hopefully someone came forward to say they know who is responsible and perhaps it will help other people to come forward and report neglect and cruelty in time to help in future.

It was the images of the people starving in Africa that made the campaigns in the 80's successful in helping them. But when the cameras leave people forget, or think it's all been fixed now. Getting the cameras turned back to them (or anyone else) to show that's not the case can really make a difference to peoples ideas and attitudes about what is happening in the rest of the world.

NoOne, I was just about to say similar. It was the disturbing images that kick started Band Aid and generated the support.

<a class="break-all" href="http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=vietnam+war&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&rlz=1W1ADFA_en&biw=1366&bih=586&tbm=isch&tbnid=kG54O-N54IHqrM:&imgrefurl=radhikaranjanmarxist.blogspot.com/2010/07/vietnam-war-contd-8.html&docid=pulZ66DBl_zJPM&imgurl=3.bp.blogspot.com/_Y9-xi5n9m3E/TCxt0OQAGPI/AAAAAAAAGcs/ISRwp5JN1s4/s1600/vietnam-war-photo.jpg&w=600&h=400&ei=AftET8DkEeOr0QXfuu3gAw&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=198&sig=110154466441211200290&page=2&tbnh=135&tbnw=175&start=10&ndsp=12&ved=0CO0BEK0DMCc&tx=81&ty=66" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">This iconic and shocking image from the Vietnam war - you'll know the one I've linked to without clicking, did a lot to publicise the horror of the war at a time when the US were being gung ho about killing the Commies.

The stark fear on those childrens' faces, surrounded by armed soldiers is appalling. Words would never make me feel the way this picture does.

I think Vietnam was the first war ever shown in it's stark reality in our living rooms, and made a huge difference to people's perception of it and war in general.
We need to see these images.

OneHand that picture haunts me. The fear on their faces conveys so much.

Hi there, we're going to move this to our ParentPort topic, as we think it's the best place for it.

For those who don't know, ParentPort is a website run by the UK's media regulators. They set and enforce standards across the media to protect children from inappropriate material. This topic is designed for discussions with other parents about something you've seen or heard that you felt was unsuitable for children. You can also make a complaint to the regulators via ParentPort.

This was the Ten o Clock News though, so well after the watershed.

The responsibility for children watching the news and seeing something unsuitable for them at that time surely lies more with the parents than the broadcasters.