Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared yesterday an hour after leaving Kuala Lumpur bound for Beijing. 239 people were on board and as I write this nobody knows what happened to them or their airplane.
Most of those people hugged friends and loved ones at the airport, smiled through their tears and said goodbye.
Forever.
Now they’re gone and the world wants to know what happened. Most of us are merely curious but a relative few, the families and friends of those on board Flight 370, are desperate for answers. For them the past 30-some hours has been a nonstop nightmare of shock, disbelief, fear and unimaginable grief.
Lives, loves and families are sometimes destroyed with no possible explanation.
In the past 24 hours most of us have seen this terrible reality play out on TV news as we snack and flip through channels looking for something worth watching. The newspapers and websites that clamor for our attention do so with pictures.
The news writers and talkers dutifully, effectively, professionally and, for the most part, responsibly report what few facts and new developments they learn.
The pictures are another matter. You can’t produce pictures of a missing airplane. You can only show the human story left behind: shock, denial, rage and terrible, terrible grief.
When does it become too much? At what point does tragedy become too personal and none of our collective business?
Each of us has our point of separation, where we turn our heads in horror from a body on a highway or respectfully avert our gaze from the bottomless grief of a parent, a child or spouse.
But if you’re a journalist, where do you draw the line, pack up your gear and walk away — leaving these tortured people to weep in privacy?
Here is what the Society of Professional Journalists has to say on the subject of ethics and sensitivity:
Journalists should:
— Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
— Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
— Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
— Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
Wait, run that last sentence by us again:
Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
Who determines what is an overriding public need?
The bottom line is very messy because it’s just as personal for news producers as it is for news consumers. It should be, at least. The SPJ guidelines are well expressed and yet hopelessly vague.
I’ll tell you one thing for sure, though. I would never publish a picture of the faces of grief surrounded by half a dozen other cameras.
This tells an unintended truth.
We might draw the line in different places but each of us must find that place.
© Dave Williams 2014
Very thoughtful piece, thoughtfully worded. I’m still thinking about it.
You have a heart and know how to express it. One of the few, if not the ONLY newsperson I’ve ever known to always be trusted to have and to give respect. Thank you for this insight into humanity.