(Bullet holes are used on the windshield of a car seen by insurgents after an attack on the camp Phoenix in Kabul.) Ahmad Masood / Reuters)
The guardian invited me to write a quick opinion piece on the explosion of the new sources of graphical online conflict videos, and what does that show sudden availability of explicit, violent material for reporting and for each of us as individual. Snip:I believe this truth is a good thing. And, as far as the spate of bloody video casting of Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Libya and elsewhere now reveal the truth, they are important. As commercial cable news channel (at least in the United States) into something more like Entertainment channels as the news agencies, she began as, to develop our access to these ugly streaming truths even more. Distant shots of the rocket drops are less likely to inspire empathy as a YouTube clip of a man in Libya, whose Unterkiefer was blown off only, who still shout for freedom is. And Yes, the video is available. the tireless Twitter chronicler on NPR's Andy Carvin (@ Acarvin) tweeted it last week, along with many other videos like it. (I don't know how he does it;) (I could keep not his tolerance or its step.)But people have no endless capacity for empathy, and is our ability not so much in the mediated, disembodied, un-real Empire of online videos. At what point is access to war Gore too harmful to the Viewer, at which point do each of us, this material for the purpose of reporting the story to observe it, are deaf or start, secondary trauma learn?
"I have to keep me to remind that we witness are Commons", Andy told me recently, when we discussed how the volume of the materials affect him personally was. "Otherwise, I think, I would have lost my mind."
"Atrocity exhibition" (guardian "Comment is free" blog, thanks to Matt Seaton)
Related: the Atlantic Ocean, Alexis Madrigal, a piece has to today's thoughts on this topic from others around the Web.
没有评论:
发表评论