How Much Information Is Enough?

[hc4361]

I am not tickle tummed and relish gory novels but I have just read a graphic news report about a violent crime that has made me feel repulsed.

Not long ago the report would simply have said that the victim suffered appalling injuries that horrified the emergency services, or something similar. This was surely to protect friends and family of the victim as much as to protect the casual readers' sensibilities.

Do we really need all the gory details to be published in our national newspapers and their online sites? I really think not.

[-Talbot-]

There are many murders in Russia every day that we don't hear about.

Would we have heard of this story if not for the gory details?
If they didn't put in the gory details it wouldn't have garnered the attention it has so, therefore, would have been pointless running the story.

[ichkeria]

Exactly.

[andy-hughes]

Talbot - // Would we have heard of this story if not for the gory details?
If they didn't put in the gory details it wouldn't have garnered the attention it has so, therefore, would have been pointless running the story. //

And maybe we would all be better if they hadn't - which harks back to the point I believe hc is making.

Just because someone has found a novel way of horribly murdering a woman is not, in my view, sufficient justification for sharing it with the world.

It benefits no-one in any way whatsoever, except for some sort of bizarre novelty 'fancy that, you'd never think it ...' approach, which is the darker side of human nature that does not deserve to be tickled by world media outlets.