FFS BBC1 news showing shot gun death

[ButterflyMcQueen]

I find the killing of the bloke disgusting in the extreme

filming and broadcasting it is beyond me and

Its not right

and yes, the more coverage the better in the dead man's view i'd have thought. oxygen of publicity and all that.

Just looked on bbcnews, they are still trying to free innocent people trapped injured in crushed cars.
They are the ones who have my sympathy, not some psycho who values life so cheaply. Live by the sword.....

the warning was like an after thought tbh

human nature meant i watched it through hands over face
i was horrified at the violence despite expecting it

i saw no resistance

dreadful

you ARE bbc management aren't you spidermama? a 'duty to remain dynamic and respond to the changing global media expectations'.

whatever happened to educate and inform?...not to mention taste and decency guidelines?

Yes dreadful. A truly awful story for all involved.

Wot yes I realise that sounded like it was lifted from a 'BBC producers guidelines' seminar. (Paid for by the licence payer and including coffee and a buffet lunch [ wink] )

that seals it. only management get lunch these days.

i wonder who you are.....hmmmm

I'm just old enough to remember when we all got lunch included. Those days are indeed gone. I even had to bring my own coffee to 'Safeguarding Trust' after the phoneline scandals.

well you don't want to risk the catering muck, do you?
i'm off now as bbc insider jesting tedious for us never mind anyone who tuned it to discuss op.
and you've probably got work tomorrow. it's public money you know - get some sleep. we don't want sleepy journo's making dodgy decisions.
oh, hang on...

Night.

so on teh one hand it's to do with the integrity of bbc editors making no decision lightly - all sounding very moral - and on the other it's to do with audience expectations (to see a real murder?) and staying dynamic (keeping ratings high by getting sensational scoops).

What wankerage. It's abhorrent.

Oh! So pleased it wasn't just me who found the whole report distateful - really didn't have to show the chap's death

I seem to be out of step in this to me it just felt that it illustrated quite clearly and starkly the brutality of the situation, the cheapness of life.

they show starving dying children, victims of torture body parts all over the ground after a bomb still no one cares

I think a lot fo people do care about those things. People are often compelled to help starving children they see by supporting a charity which is helping or campaigning for change.

Many people would object to body parts for reasons similar to those on this thread.

Am I the only person who doesn't have a clue what this thread is about? Can someone explain to me?

it was awful and shocking, the very idea that a civilian rides along with the army run up to a guy and shoot hi in the head, the fact that this man was deliberately causing carnage, it was all awful and shocking.

the reporter looked shaken maybe the editorial decision was hasty but it certainly illustrated the horror of the situation, it is a bit different from
'and today this happened' with generic shots

not much dignity in life not much dignity in death all so brutal

in defence of bbc news, 'generic shots' would never be used in a news piece like this. it would all be gathered on the day and specially for the piece unless otherwise labelled (ie 'library pics')

i was left wondering how come a civilian had a gun - no one seemed bothered by that. is that usual in israel?

i think the issue with showing this sort of thing is that it sets up a hierarchy - so there are people whose death we'd never get to witness (say for instance there was footage of the two french students who've been found stabbed and burned) and those who we do get to see (african babies eg "little bonniface died just ten minutes after we filmed him" or 'very bad people' eg the palestinian bulldozer driver). But who gets to say how the hierarchy is structured?

we're all human and should be afforded some dignity in any situation otherwise it cheapens us all.

I was hoping there would be a thread on this. When I heard the warning at the front of the news report about "there is footage of the man being shot dead" or words to that effect - I guess I was expecting some distant blurry footage of a figure falling to the ground. The fact that the shot was very clear and that the action was then almost frozen whilst a helpful bubble was put around the man's head just in case you were at all confused about where to look - and then you very clearly saw AND heard the two bullets being pumped at very close range into his head - all the time with a running commentary - that's what I found appalling - that's when I then turned over in disgust. YES the incident was dreadful, another in the catalogue of tragedy over there but this footage was broadcast in it's entirety BECAUSE THEY HAD IT. An exclusive coup.

They could have edited around it - they would still have had a story - Yes, it's TV and not Radio - BUT please, fgs that was completely not necessary. THe debate in the news room would have been whether they could get away with showing this footage - and in today's climate it seems the ante is always being upped and the news is getting more and more graphic. So ALL news organisations are pushing it further and further.

And 2shoes - just because there are people getting outraged at this footage does not in anyway lessen their horror or disgust at what this man did in the first place. They are not mutually exclusive feelings.

well unless I have missed it. this is the only thread I have seen.
all about the showing of a man being shot. his crimes overlooked and the poor people who died un mentioned.

For Mindalina and others unsure of what this thread is about

Man drives bulldozer through street in jerusalem