An Argument For Not Taking Down Horrific Videos

A few days ago, we posted a story that asked whether posting horrific videos online served a legitimate journalistic purpose; some images that are shocking in their violence are now routinely available, including and especially the recent video of Jordanian pilot Muath al-Kaseasbeh being burned alive. Matthew Ingram writes at GigaOm that, whatever you think of the motives or results of the traditional news media showing such videos or choosing not to, there's good reason for social media sites not to reflexively remove such content.

Comments

Re:I've got this

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. If you start censoring them, then you are effectively doing the job of terrorists by trying to remove freedom.

Re: I've got this

[epyT-R]

The for the children excuse is the most abused one by tyrants. If your kids can't handle the internet then maybe you should be teaching them about the harsh realities of life instead of your own fantasy world where everyone is a loving hipster.

Attention: Media

[MrKaos]

More sex, less violence please.

Re: I've got this

[Anonymous Coward]

Teaching a child about people burning other people alive isn't as easy as it sounds.

Free Speech or Die

[zapadnik]

As bad as these videos are, censorship is a vastly greater evil. Who decides what is censored and what is not? Who appoints the censors? This is a problem which even the Romans wrestled with.

Don't think censorship is bad? if your are:

• A Modern Liberal/Progressive - do you want social conservatives to be able to censor your speech?
• A Classic Liberal/Constitutional Conservative - do you want the neo-Marxists to be able to censor your speech?
• A scientist - do you want an Intelligent Designer to be able to censor your speech?
• Religious - do you want anti-theists to be able to censor your speech?
• An Israel - do you want the jihadis to be able to censor you speech?
• A Muslim - do you want the Jews to be able to censor your speech?
• An atheist - do you want the Islamic State/Caliphate to be able to censor your speech?
• An American - do you want the North Koreans to be able to censor your speech?
• Chinese - do you want the Americans to be able to censor your speech?

You all get the picture. Censorship is bad. In the formerly-Free West we understood that censorship was worse than most bad speech. But now there are very, very many who believe so fervently in their cause that they are willing to silence all dissenting voices - this is a great regression in the World (but unfortunately, even Slashdotters ardently apply censorship through their mod points [not modding up posts they like, but deliberately trying to silence posts they don't agree with]).

The true solution to Bad Speech is *more speech*. This is what Free Speech is all about - let ideas compete in the open arena of public discourse - no matter how offensive and uncomfortable for those with political, religious or financial power.

Only authoritarians or totalitarians which to censor the speech of others:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall (often misattributed to Voltaire)

This is the principle that should reign - and the US 1st Amendment to the Constitution is brilliant in allowing Free Speech to flourish. Too bad the powers in the US, EU and UN (eg. the disgusting UN HRC 16/18) are working to destroy Free Speech criticism of the powerful - and ensuring that you don't get a vote or say in the matter.

There is no substitute for Liberty!

Re:I've got this

[Anonymous Coward]

The argument can also be had by not remove them you are doing the job of terrorists for them. They created the videos so people would see them and instil fear. There really is no win situation here, showing them gets them the media exposure they desire and not showing them restricts your freedom. It is a case of pick your poison.

Re:I've got this

[epyT-R]

However, it's also good for the public to have all the facts..and pictures can send a much more accurate description than dry, politically correct speech from some anchorman. Give them the media exposure.. It just shows how degenerate they are.

Re:I've got this

[Kielistic]

In the end the truth actually hurts the public self interests more

Said every corrupt dictator ever. You somehow think you're qualified to judge what "truth" the public can handle?