If you are interested in joining future Face Off debates, fill out this form to submit your application.
For: Chan Bo Wen, 14, HKCCCU Logos Academy
Photography is an integral part of journalism. The front pages of newspapers regularly display photos that illustrate the headline, and such images play as important a role in the news as the words beneath them.
In fact, one 2008 study discovered that readers remembered news articles better if a strong photograph accompanied them. However, when news reports cover gruesome events, should images depicting them still be published? I firmly believe so, as these photos provide a complete picture of the corresponding story, make the report more reliable, and inspire the public to take action.
A psychologist explains how students can handle the mental health impacts of distressing news
Images present the reader with the whole story, which cannot be achieved solely through writing – after all, “a picture is worth a thousand words”. An honest image of an incident beside an objective news article is arguably the most complete source of information. Compared to articles that dare not include pictures for fear they might be too disturbing, these candid pieces that report the actual scene of the event are a far superior source of news, allowing the reader to see the whole picture.
Photographs increase the credibility of news reports. According to The Psychology of Fake News, adding a picture to a social media post or news article makes people more likely to believe it is true. If the addition of an image can bias readers, what impact could a grisly photograph of the scene have? A picture can convince the viewer that the account is accurate. Isn’t validity one of the core aims of a news organisation? Including a snapshot could persuade the reader to believe the story and take it seriously.
Images of frightful scenes can make people pay more attention. This can, in turn, spur them to take action and lead to real-life change. After a US school shooting in 2022, CNN presenter Jake Tapper said: “Maybe the shock to the system [showing graphic images of victims] would prompt our leaders to figure out how to make sure society can stop these troubled men from obtaining these weapons used to slaughter our children.” If a striking image of gruesome news could lead to meaningful change, why would we prevent it?
Against: Tess Ho, 14, Hong Kong International School
Newspapers and magazines often face controversy when they publish graphic images.
Pictures containing blood, violence or dead bodies can make people uncomfortable. Since newspapers are visible to the public, younger people may be upset by such images. Research shows that photos containing graphic violence can harm children’s mental health. Exposure to gruesome images can have negative effects, such as becoming desensitised to violence and developing aggressive attitudes toward others. Children’s brains are still developing, and exposure to such content will only harm them. In this case, ignorance is bliss.
Students debate whether social media platforms should be regulated
Publishing gruesome images profits from the misfortune of others and disrespects victims. A recent example is Kobe Bryant and his daughter Gianna, who died in a helicopter crash in 2020. Bryant’s wife Vanessa sued Los Angeles County after employees of its fire and sheriff departments shared photos of human remains from the crash. She expressed her fears of seeing photos of her daughter’s remains on social media. California has since passed a law prohibiting first responders from taking unauthorised pictures of people who have died at an accident or crime scene.
A recent local example is the gruesome murder of Abby Choi. Many news stories included graphic details about the murder and the state of her body when it was found. Thankfully, images of this murder haven’t been released. However, if images of Choi’s remains were published, then her family – including her young children – would need to deal with the trauma for the rest of their lives. In addition, publishing such images would disregard the family’s privacy.
Some may argue that these images expose us to a greater truth and raise awareness, but words also have the power to do this. Publishing these images is not worth the mental distress it would cause. In addition, many news outlets that publish these brutal images do so simply for clickbait.
Ultimately, no matter how severe the issue, the media shouldn’t broadcast images that could harm children’s well-being.
