Print or Not to Print
As far as the image of the train bombings in Spain, I ask my self the question what is the difference between printing in black and white and shading the red blood to make it grey. In both cases, you are removing the graphic content of the Image so as to be acceptable to the reader, to give the reader the story without shocking the more sensitive of the general public including children that could see the Image. I think a sensible line was drawn by both Newspapers, both manipulating the image to make it acceptable to the perceived sensibilities of the general public.
The Burned soldier
The image of the burned body is a graphic reminder of war and the consequences that face the people involved in the fighting and although graphic I think it is necessary to show these pictures if it will prevent the politicians even in some small way to try to avoid the war that they sometimes promote for spurious reasons. Before a graphic image is to be printed and publicised certain question should and need to be asked. These are my thoughts on the subject. First, is the Image going to upset and or traumatise the relatives of the deceased, or as in the Image of the burned soldier is the Image ominous, second is the printing of the Image for a good reason, i.e. will it emotionalise people for a productive reason, i.e. promote governments and or charities in to action to save peoples lives. Then there is the question of taste that overlaps some of the above. Is the image in good moral taste or is there a good enough reason to put moral taste to one side for the good of the many. This is a question I can’t answer at this time and to be honest I am glad I don’t need to make those decisions. For me, it would have to be on an Image to Image basis asking myself some of the questions above.