Discussions

This morning starfm shared the image of the drowned Syrian migrant boy. Should these graphic images be shared on social media?

 
 
Edited by james smith, 2015-09-03 09:18:54

Bbc and cbc news sites contain a graphic content warning.

You rather that everyone remains unaware of what is really going on out there?  
I think it is important for people to be aware of what is going on....  

Don't be upset that social media is posting it, be outraged that these horrors are actually happening!

First graphic image I saw was when they walked a north Vietnamese soldier out in a street and shot him through the head using a pistol. Maybe not something I should have seen at that age because it caused a few sleepless nights,but it was a wake up call about the world that existed out there.  
We live in a world that is far from perfect, it can be cruel, violet and inhumane, and to deny that fact is far more damaging than having to explain, or understand, facts of our world or life in general.

Two things occurred to me when I saw this ...  
 
1. It was more important to get the picture than to offer the child any dignity in death, clearly he wasn't moved before the photo was taken.  
2. It sensationalizes one death forgetting the approximately 20,000 other children that died around the world on the same day and undoubtedly in some cases in worse circumstances

It was on the news today also that a Winnipeg woman beat her infant to death. We are capable of being heart broken for this baby without seeing pictures. We are capable of discussing post partum health without pictures.  
It's insulting to argue we won't care if we don't see shocking and disturbing images.

Being sensitive to the image of a dead child and being ignorant of the world are not one and the same. Being sensitive to graphic images doesn't mean I'm not heartbroken or outraged or don't want to talk about it.  
Newspapers and facebook are different in my opinion. I expect things when I choose to pick up a newspaper compared to when I casually scroll through my newsfeed waiting for the coffee. I think a censored image with a link to the article would have been a more appropriate choice for a facebook post. I see now they've posted a photo of the child when alive. I'm still heartbroken.

The fact that a post has been started to discuss the image, and not the actual problem, tells me that most people prefer to live in a bubble and not concern themselves with things outside their world.  
 
The photo was needed, and I'm glad people are seeing it

Opinionated said "The fact that a post has been started to discuss the image, and not the actual problem, tells me that most people prefer to live in a bubble and not concern themselves with things outside their world.     The photo was needed, and I'm glad people are seeing it "

The picture of the boy on the beach is used by the media to get a reaction from people. Clearly it is working since we are talking about it. Society lives in a bubble, worrying about their own day to day and not looking at a larger global picture. The picture of the boy tugs at viewers heart strings which ignites more of a reaction. What is happening to migrants in Europe & Syria is unimaginable for anyone living in a war-free country. These pictures give us a brief glimpse of the chaos happening over seas! My sympathies to anyone affected by the chaos and uncertainty overseas!

So you don't think the picture was necessary, but it sure captured your attention, didn't it. It probably caught the attention of a lot of other people too.  
 
Those pictures are there to grab people's attention, and stir up their feelings, so that they will read the more detailed article.  
 
If you don't like it showing up on your newsfeed on facebook, maybe you should be friends with more lighthearted people, who post videos of puppies, rather than current world issues.

that I necessarily agree with graphic photos of death but throughout this discussion I feel like I have been swayed towards the showing of these pictures. Yes...most of us have empathy and can feel pain without viewing a mangled body. But, as others have posted, the world is not always a fair and loving place. And acts of nature along with cruelty of mankind have done atrocious things to us. And I for one do not think we should censor ourselves or our children, for that matter. I watched a movie/video on the victims of the holocaust in high school and it, and that war left a lasting impression on me. I suppose it was probably the first I realized that the world could be so cruel. And without those images, the message would not have gotten through. I think we need to keep our eyes and ears open to what is going on around us. And to help, if we can.

Images like this are important in the grand scheme of things because they help sway public opinion. Just like Napalm Girl did in the 1970s which helped sway the US public opinion to end the war.  

Even if you care not to see graphic images I feel it is important for news outlets to post these for those that do.  
 
However I know of one website that blacks out the picture and states on it "click to reveal graphic image" as a protection.  

good for you wild roses

Got more attention world wide than this human tragedy. Yes people are concerned but definitely not with the same outrage as when the world found out that Cecil was killed by a dentist from the United States. I guess people rationalize that lions are an endangered species but there are 6 billion people on the planet so they have to pick they're fights and stick up for the lion.