Videos and audio clips of someone being shot, a disaster victim crying for help, bodies being recovered and other potentially disturbing scenes present us with challenges.
When weighing whether to post such videos online and to use any clips on the air, keep in mind that:
– Conversations are required. The senior news manager on duty (a DME or the designated supervisor) must be consulted. The Visuals team should be pulled in. Other senior editors may be as well.
– The conversations start from this position: We report the news, good and bad.
– But we can't be callous. The video may show someone's death. Out of respect for that person and that person's family, we consider carefully what should be shown or heard. Our general rule is that we do not post video or play audio of someone's moment of death. There will be exceptions, but only after discussion.
– We also respect our audience. They want the facts. But for many, reading or hearing descriptions will be more than enough. Seeing or hearing disturbing events could leave them too shaken to follow the rest of a story.
– "Every other news outlet else is using it" is not on its own a justification for posting or broadcasting anything.
– Especially in the first minutes and hours after such content surfaces, its credibility may be in doubt. Proceed with caution.
– The content may be propaganda. For example, extremist groups spread their messages and try to spread terror by putting out videos of hostages being murdered. We do not blindly post or air propaganda. It would be highly unusual for us to even link to it.
Rigid rules about what to do won't work. Each situation is different. However:
– If it's decided that videos with potentially disturbing content can be posted, they should never start automatically when a webpage loads. They must require a "click" to begin. They must either have a warning note embedded in them or it must appear directly above them.
– Likewise, on the air listeners should never hear potentially disturbing content without first being told that it's coming. For instance, cellphone audio of gunshots that kill a man should not be heard until after a caution has been given.
– We should consider whether a video's disturbing moments and sounds can and should be blurred and bleeped, for posting online and using on the air.
– If the original content is too disturbing to post and we do not have a blurred/bleeped version that we are comfortable using, we may decide to link to another news outlet's edited version if it is in line with our standards. We should caution readers that it includes potentially disturbing content. The language should be simple and clear. For example: "The Daily Planet has posted a clip from the video here. Reminder: It is graphic."
– When a member station is chasing the same story, we should talk with the news director about how to handle the content. Often, we'll be in agreement and can link to the station's coverage.
But, But, But:
– Does this mean we'll never put such content online or on the air?
No. See above: "We report the news, good and bad." We would not have edited a video of the Challenger explosion, for example, to blur the key moments.
– Are we treating the audience like children?
Some will say we are. We believe we're making editorial judgments.
Note: The guidance above applies to images as well. We do not post potentially disturbing photos without first discussing.
(Memmos; Aug. 11, 2015. This guidance has also been posted under "Respect.")