It goes—almost without saying—that the role of news and analysis outlets is to share vital information as it becomes necessary to the story and the news. This duty, although curtailed by ethics and limited resources, generally supersedes most other duties. However, shifting media landscapes beget new concerns and rules. This is especially the case in considering just how to handle viral videos of violent deaths.
The matter of how videos should be handled is especially important as video released in the death of Laquan McDonald in Chicago raises just as many questions as answers. Now that it is clear that Officer Jason Van Dyke acted in a heinous manner in shooting McDonald so many times, why did Cook County Attorney Anita Alvarez take so long in choosing to indict? According to comments made in a press conference Tuesday afternoon, the decision to even indict now seems to be tied to backlash from the video. While Alvarez of course knocked down a couple straw men in admonishing violent protests before they even happened, this response shows the power that videos from dash cams and other new police accountability tools have in ending police violence.
In the basic interest of news and in that interest of accountability, it is necessary for outlets to share the video. However, there are hidden costs; those of long-term fatigue, mental health, and desensitization among viewers, especially in long-running coverage of social phenomena like Black Lives Matter, which covers black deaths. There is also the simple fact that videos and other media are often the most effective hooks for content, whether they are used in a way to actually advance news or not. All of these considerations are important for how outlets and journalists choose to both uphold the most basic duty and uphold basic ethics.
Using videos sparingly when necessary to tell the story, and providing warnings when graphic content (videos and images) is expected are good ways to fulfill the duty both to the truth and to readers. Some columns become clearinghouses for visuals of black deaths; this is a good way to desensitize readers to the true impacts of violence and to necessitate increasing the stakes each time. Deaths should be treated as something more than tools to produce outrage, regardless of how justified the rage is. Some other columns dodge the issues completely and enable soft language to downplay the events where video could be useful. Both of these shirk essential duties. Somewhere in the middle there is the way.