General Question

Kelly27's avatar

What is your opinion on the ban being lifted on the media coverage of returning fallen soldiers?

Asked by Kelly27 (1501points) April 28th, 2009

Once the ban was lifted the first fallen soldier to return home to the United States was covered by 40 members of the press, the most recent to return home was covered by just one photographer. Obviously the interest died down very quickly when it comes to the media.
Should it be covered and why or why not?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

13 Answers

MrKnowItAll's avatar

That which is denied, becomes more sought after.

crisw's avatar

I think it should be up to the families involved.

Kelly27's avatar

@crisw I am not positive but I do believe they need the families permission.

ragingloli's avatar

The media should not be censored. Censorship invariably leads to an incomplete picture of reality. In this case, it leads to the erroneous depiction of war as a clean process. It should be covered because it shows the dirty side of war, which people have to know.

Kelly27's avatar

@ragingloli Ok, but now that they can cover it, it doesn’t seem they really want to do so. Are you more aware of the deaths occurring now than you were a few weeks ago, do we really need to see it to believe it? I am undecided but I do agree with @crisw that it should be up to the family.

hungryhungryhortence's avatar

I like the idea of families giving permission for the rest of the country to see and acknowledge the reality of human casualty and sacrifice. It makes me angry to think people might gather and make noise against the military during these viewings though, I wouldn’t want it to be an opportunity for disrespect.

avalmez's avatar

those unfortunate returns of our fallen sons and daughters have been covered by the media,and the examples i’ve seen are very respectful and solemn.

did any of you view “Bringing Chance Home”? a true story you know and one which has no editorial bent other than to focus on the respect and honor americans have shown when confronted with the terrible reults of war.

pictures of plane passengers peering through their windows as a flag drapped casket is loaded or removed from the cargo area of their plane.

The ban was wrong to begin with. Removing the ban should not result in sensationalism or promotion of any particular view of the war and its terrible and inevitable results.

ours is a volunteer force, and regardless of why they ended up in harms way, our fallen deserve our respect, and their families our love and sympathy.

adreamofautumn's avatar

There should never have been a ban in the first place. If this country is going to be at war, the citizens should know what the ramifications of that war are. I know we know the ramifications, but it’s easy to forget/ignore something if you aren’t seeing it. I think the media lost interest for a number of reasons (not the least of which is swine flu), but I think it’s good the ban is lifted.

RedPowerLady's avatar

I agree with @crisw . It should be soley up to the families.

I see it two ways:
1. Allowing us to see fallen soldiers is important. It puts faces to the inordinate amount of deaths that are taking place. It makes war more real than political. This has helped in the past and would also help today.
2. Showing faces of those who have passed for pure media enjoyment is horrible. We as a culture need a deeper respect for the deceased. I think it is despicable to exploit fallen soldiers.

Darwin's avatar

I agree that there should never have been a ban in the first place. It went along with other attempts by Bush and company to conduct government in secret.

The lifting of the ban was the event that the media was really trying to document. Once it became business as usual, the number of photographers dropped. As long as such images are respectful, though, I think they do show us the human cost of this war.

I grew up during the Vietnam Era, when the names of the fallen from our high school were read out during morning announcements, and live images of soldiers shooting at others and soldiers being wounded were shown along with dinner. I think that let all Americans understand the cost of that war. I suspect if we did the same with Iraq and Afghanistan more folks would see what is going on.

I live in a military town so I know large numbers of people who have been in the Middle East or are there now or who will be shipping out soon. Thus, it is very high in my consciousness. I don’t know if the same is true for those who live in non-military communities.

I do know that I stop and think every time I pass the house down the street with the Gold Star banner in the front window.

alive's avatar

we have a law: freedom of the press. They should be able to cover it. But we also live in a capitalist society that is less concerned with providing the public with fair, well researched news stories and more concerned with selling the most news papers, so once something is no longer hott hott hott, it is not going to be front page news.

also, bush is out of office and there is already so little support for the war there is less political incentive to cover it. now the incentive is to cover obama issues…

Megadancer101's avatar

I like everyone eleses ansers!

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther