How far is too far?
NPR reporter Phillip Reeves’ story about a YouTube video that showed the Taliban flogging a teenager, which was her punishment for being seen in public with a man who wasn’t her husband, aired during the April 7th segment of “Morning Edition.”
Some listeners have complained that the story, which opened with Reeves talking over a 26-second sound bite of the whip and the girl’s screams, was horrifying and that the introduction to the piece from the show’s host was an insufficient warning for its graphic nature.
What ethical considerations should journalists have when reporting for radio? Should they refrain from using bites that may offend some sensitive listeners, or should they use whichever that appropriately tell the story?
Radio reporters use natural sound and spoken words to create imagery and transport listeners to the scene; they don’t have the tools of video, photos or written text to help them.
The YouTube video of the flogging is about two minutes long. After the opening bite, Reeves moved on to quotes and sound bites of protesters who were in upheaval over the video.
I agree with NPR Ombudsman Alicia C. Shepard that the bite was essential to the story; without the sounds of the whip and the screams, the story wouldn’t have had as great of an impact.
The video of the flogging, even with its blurry image, packed more of an emotional punch for me because of its longer duration and visual element than the bite in Reeves’ story. But the radio piece was as effective as it needed to be and made me feel like I was at the scene.
Leave a Reply