Ethical of SF Chronicle/Gate putting a mountain lion maul victim on SF Gate Cover Page?
here is the site:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/13/BAGTCO452D7.DTL
I believe so. But what about the kids?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Okay. I'll bite. What *about* the kids?
As a prominent news paper serving a largely metropolitan area, The SF Gate and Chronicle do have a responsibility to its readers to give them stories that are both useful and entertaining. However, a story about a mountain lion attack that shows the full and graphic picture of the recent maul victim still propped up in a hospital bed balances, just barely, on the fine line between useful and morbidly entertaining. For the purpose of showing just how vicious these things can be—mountain lion attacks—I believe the SF Gate had the responsibility of showing the victim so that readers can see with their own eyes that pumas are serious business. But, what about the kids? The fact that the Gate serves a large metro area where most children surely have internet access makes it hard to give them the go in posting pictures that might be harmful to young viewers. I guess, if nothing else, the kids that read this article and see this victim will be aware of how intense and violent a wilderness mountain lion attack can be.
Post a Comment