The recent Boston bombing tragedy has brought to the fore the question about what is too much to display in terms of visual media. Most media outlets displayed the top photograph but the bottom one clearly reveals the immense magnitude of what happened. But does that make it right? Are there guidelines for making these decisions or are they decisions made by the editorial staff on each newspaper?
We display horrific images from war zones and it's usually these photos that win Pulitzer prizes but domestic terror we have quibbles about? Why is that? Maybe the real face of evil needs to be constantly revealed because otherwise its banality will continue?
What do you think? In my case I would take the picture and let my photo editor make the decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment