Was there any need?

[anotheoldgit]

http://tinyurl.com/3tc7nwx

I personnaly think that the DailyMail has gone too far this time, in printing these horrendous pictures of this young man's final moments.

Surely it was enough to report on this disastrous accident without the need to illustrate all the gory details?

[anotheoldgit]

Teddy-boy

I could have hardly put my question without also including the evidence, what would the majority of ABers have said "where's the link"? I presume, and quite rightly so.

I am sorry that you chose to criticise me for what, putting the question or including the link?

Since you did not open the link, then I take it, it was for putting the question, are we to only put questions that you agree with?

Incidently if one refrains from including a link, how are persons supposed to come to a opinion on the subject in hand?

It is like sentencing a person without first looking at all the evidence.

[Lore]

There certainly isn't any need for it, AOG. Maybe a photo of him in different circumstances - previous to the accident to give the reader something to relate to would have been more appropriate. I chose not to open the link, the story is sad enough without it being visually displayed.

[Sqad]

I repeat my previous post...."where are the gory details illustrated?"

[boxtops]

Should we be berating the DM for printing it, or whoever took the pics, for making them available to the DM,,,,?

[pa___ul3]

squad, I appreciate that, as a doctor (if I'm right), you may be more used to encountering images of death than most, but as I've never knowingly seen a dead body (think I may have but not sure as the ambulance was still there) I'd absolutely say that the last image was gory enough! Appreciate it's not to the literal sense but the sentiment is the same.

[joggerjayne]

Well, the Daily Mail does not automatically publish EVERY photo or story it receives.

The editorial staff have to decide ...

"Is this something that we should pass on to our millions of readers?"

"Or would that be bad taste?"

"Or ... do we care about bad taste or not, as long as we sell more copies of our raggy tabloid?"

[Sqad]

pa_ul3.....right.

[EcclesCake]

I'm with Sqad on this one, and refer to my earlier post.

[boxtops]

As a matter of fact, those photos have just been shown on the local TV news here, since the incident happened in Kent. Same pics.

[pa___ul3]

it is in context though ecclescake, so everyone knows that, in that last picture, he's dead (or at least fatally injured), and I may be being a sensitive little soul but I don't really want to be seeing photos of someone's death, and I certainly don't think it's right for a national newspaper to show them.

[joggerjayne]

Kent has always been a dangerous county.

It looks like the whole county could break off, and float off to sea.

Okay, I know it would only get as far as Belgium, and then run aground ... but you get my drift.

[EcclesCake]

I have to say I'm surprised at how sensitive people are here. There are far, far worse images in the news every day, far more graphic and horrific than those related to this news story.

If you were shown those images out of this context I doubt anyone would be horrified/disgusted/etc.

I am clearly missing sonething, and before anyone comments - my compassion gene is in for servicing.

[boxtops]

LOL JJ, it's all those Men of Kent and Kentish men... if my office drifts off in a storm, I'll be in Calais.

[Sqad]

Eccles.....during the IRA bombing, the media showed horses that had been blown apart.....nobody criticised the media ....that I agree was "gory"......but a chap lying in a field, everyone seems to be ultrasensitive.

[EcclesCake]

Sqad, I can only assume we have dealt with a harsher reality than some.....

[boxtops]

Sqad, I see your point. We daily see pics of injured people in Afghanistan or Syria, some are clearly dead or nearly. This is closer to home, an ordinary bloke - I wonder if this what's upsetting people.

[joggerjayne]

Eccles ...

I think there is an argument that we should not be shown anything graphic ...

... because we are ...

... too immature to deal with it, or something ?

(I think the argument was discussed in George Orwell's "1984")

The grown up people at the newspapers, who CAN cope with such images, get to decide what we simple, jeuvenile members of the proletariat can, or cannot, handle.

The newspaper people then get to feed us ONLY the appropriate images.

That way, we unintelligent masses do not get out of control through viewing unsuitable material.

[Sqad]

boxtops....fine....it may well be, but I am complaining about the adjective "gory"