-
reports on bbclondon of news film crews trying to muscle in on grieving families for a scoop, one's had their camera smashed to bits by the local mandem, and rightly so.
Reports from journalists on scene at the time were that they were asked to move on, and one crew didn't move on quickly enough.
Completely understand the sentiment - it seems voyeuristic to film a situation like this. There's always a delicacy to covering tragedies. Maybe some people on the ground got it wrong, and if they were overly intrusive, then that was definitely a stupid, insensitive thing to do that they shouldn't have done.
But there's a balance to be struck. Without coverage of the tragedy, we're unlikely to see the political pressure build enough for the government to take action to ensure something like this doesn't happen again. And images are much more effective at conveying news than words.
h2o-
Do you really think that there will not be enough coverage of individuals suffering in the aftermath of this to cause some change?
I really struggle to understand why the media can't just leave well alone in the immediate aftermath. Cover the bigger incident, and be open to people seeking you out to talk, but don't go around sticking a camera in peoples faces for a few days
branwen
reports on bbclondon of news film crews trying to muscle in on grieving families for a scoop, one's had their camera smashed to bits by the local mandem, and rightly so.