Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be shocked by BBC's 6 pm news

30 replies

LittleSilver · 20/01/2010 18:20

I have just turned it off.

They showed a woman in Haiti in advanced labour and an American medic of some sort completely losing it and yelling "I can't deliver a breech baby, I can't deliver a breech baby!". They kept zooming in and out on this poor woman. Am I alone in thinking this is an appalling breech of this woman's right to provacy and dignity and the BBC should be ashamed of themselves.

Now off to complain.

OP posts:
ImSoNotTelling · 20/01/2010 18:27

Sounds awful.

I don't like the way the camera lingers on people in dire situations at all. Last night it was a girl who was dying and they kept zooming in on her face. Horrible.

ProfYaffle · 20/01/2010 18:29

I agree. I saw it too and said 'fgs, get the camera out of the poor woman's face' - disgraceful.

daftpunk · 20/01/2010 18:35

Haven't seen it....but saw yesterday's with the little girl dying...actually made me cry....

But maybe that's what it was supposed to do...?

MadamDeathstare · 20/01/2010 18:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BigBadMummy · 20/01/2010 18:38

Horrific.

I didn't see it but I hope they do not show it again on the 9pm news.

They must also realise that children are watching TV at this time of night.

heQet · 20/01/2010 18:38

I don't think many reporters care. I may be being horrible, but I think they don't see the people, they just want the 'best' story. The one that will further their career, get them an award. I think they are probably quite hardened "oh yes, zoom in on that corpse, can you see the flies, brilliant, go round a bit"
Sorry, but I can't help thinking that's how it is.

MadamDeathstare · 20/01/2010 18:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
LittleSilver · 20/01/2010 18:41

well, i've just submitted my online complaint. Would love to see if Director-General woulf find it acceptablr for HIS wife to be filmed giving birth and put on international news.

OP posts:
Original poster
LittleSilver · 20/01/2010 18:41

sorry for typos bf

OP posts:
catsdontscreetch · 20/01/2010 18:43

I just can't watch it anymore, me being floods of tears every night isn't helping those people. I'm aware it's awful, and I don't want 'fluffy' news but it does seem the news channels are in acompetition to come out withthe most heart rending footage.

I think an update each day on how (if) aid is getting through would be enough.

skidoodle · 20/01/2010 18:48

"I can understand trying to shock people into giving more aid"

the BBC should not be doing that

"but saw yesterday's with the little girl dying...actually made me cry....

But maybe that's what it was supposed to do...?"

I know what you mean, and you might be right about the intention of the person who chose to include those shots, but that little girl was not dying in order that people in the UK be made cry and deliberately using her to evoke that response is cynical and wrong.

There is no way they would show footage of a little British girl dying on the 6, so they shouldn't be doing it to little Haitian girls either.

TheCrackFox · 20/01/2010 18:49

I completely agree with you Heqet. I don't think they see their story as anything other than news and not another human who would like to retain their dignity.

Romanarama · 20/01/2010 18:52

I think tbh it's what the reporters see, and it's really shocking, but that's what they're looking at all the time while they're there. It's quite important that it continues to make headlines so that Ministers continue to make an effort to set aside funding to help. You can't give money to Haitian babies instead of British ones unless Haiti's on the news. For example - how much have we all been worrying about Burma for the last couple of months.

mumonthenet · 20/01/2010 18:57

totally agree with you all.

This kind of stuff is just for the scoop. It is an invasion of the privacy of the dead and dying, and those in labour.

Yes the public have a right to be informed. But those victims have rights too. And we have a right not to be manipulated by the power-drunk media who seem to be able to decide for us.

...and now I'm on a roll..... I was horrified when the World Press Photograph of the year was a dead body after the Asian tsunami. I wondered what skill that photographer had actually shown for him/her to be so applauded.

smallorange · 20/01/2010 18:59

I'm not defending it but I think it's a hard call to make -what you show or don't show- I think the crews out there are probably tremendously affected by what they see and the urge to tell the story, convey the horror, must be overwhelming.

I haven't watched any of it though. Just listened to the radio.

overmydeadbody · 20/01/2010 18:59

times like this I remember why I don't have a TV and don;t let DS watch the news at other people's houses.

Peachy · 20/01/2010 19:04

Hmm.

Me, I wouldn't have cared less at having my birth on the news if I thought there was a chance it might get people to send help for us...one of the ladies there giving birth had lost her son in the quake, strongly suspect she didn't give a flying damnations about anything above getting this baby born safely.

However there does need to be a debate about limits. I didn'tsee the news yesterday but I think a girl dying wouldn't have made me give more (have given what I can anyway) but would have possibly given me nightmares and haunted me for along time, same as some of the footage for comic relief which means I just don't watch it now.

There is definitely a debate that needs to be had, I think. For a start we need to know if evermore explicit images contribute to care fatigue. I think it probably does. You have to develop a thick skin or switch over, unless you have unlimited resources and feel OK that you are able to do enough.

MoreCrackThanHarlem · 20/01/2010 19:05

I just watched ITN news and saw a boy being pulled alive from the rubble after being trapped for 8 days.
He lifted his arms into the air with joy before being passed to his father. Dd is in floods of tears. Amazing.

mumonthenet · 20/01/2010 19:11

peachy, yes I see your point that she probably wouldn't care (the labouring mother) - maybe I wouldn't either, but do we have the right (or do the news agencies have the right) to decide for those people?

I don't know the answer - since obviously no-one's going to run up to the dying and ask them to sign an authorisation......

I also think the matter needs some debate.

Fibilou · 20/01/2010 19:17

How do we know that the mother didn't give permission ?

poissonfou · 20/01/2010 19:29

yes it is hard to watch ,i found my eyes welling with tears most nights watching the news,but i would rather that than be in ignorance to the absolute suffering that is going on and if my 7 year old is with me it is difficult for her to watch but perhaps it's time we stopped sheltering our children from this sufferin,where it is appropriate-it's a reminder that not everyone is as lucky as some in this world

piscesmoon · 20/01/2010 19:46

I find it very upsetting but I don't think that we should be shielded just because we can sit comfortably at home and be left in ignorance.

ImSoNotTelling · 20/01/2010 20:32

It's not to do with being shielded, it's to do with the erosion of boundaries by ever more explicit images.

That report on ethiopia by michael burke was a watershed moment in reporting and fundraising and awareness and so on, and over the years we have been exposed to ever more extreme images.

The same as films are becoming more explicit in violence and porn is becoming more "hardcore" - people get immune. The difference is that people choose what films and what porn to watch - they know the content. With the BBC news (and realistically you can't stop watching the news because of what you might see) there is not a choice to view ever worsening images.

This argument about not being shielded is not right - there has to be a line somewhere. I do not need to be shown exactly the bad thing - I have an imagination, things can easily be conveyed without such explicit images. Where does it end?

They also forget that for all of the people who have seen disasters before, there will be a whole load of people watching who have never seen anything like this before in their lives, who are seeing it fresh. That seems hard.

i think that the journalists understandably have more "care fatigue" than their public, and they forget that.

Georgimama · 20/01/2010 20:44

This is not a new issue. Kevin Carter, a Pulitzer prize winning photographer was haunted by his work (which included http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/odds_and_oddities/ultimate_in_unfair.htm this photo of a child in Sudan collapsing that he committed suicide. It's a horrible dichotomy - how far is too far?

I do agree though that there is a mass desensitisation to violent (and sexual) images which is Not A Good Thing.

I do find this kind of invasion quite offensive though. But I have a superbly vivid imagination and can picture quite easily how horrific it must be in Haiti right now. Perhaps other people don't.

Georgimama · 20/01/2010 20:44

OK, link didn't work. Try again

here

Swipe left for the next trending thread