I’m perplexed. You see, in the UK there is a fairly distinct lack of blood and gore on the front pages of newspapers. And on television, although they may broadcast some unpleasant images late at night, and with plenty of prior warning to allow the squeamish to look away. Here? Well the copy of today’s Grafico newspaper that I’ve embedded below is actually fairly mild. Sometimes there are photos of decapitated heads, and worse.
I think there is a fine line between sordid journalism and censored journalism. The ideal, I guess, would be called responsible journalism. If you show too much, the population becomes hardened to acts of brutality and it becomes normal. Too little and you are misrepresenting reality. But in Mexico today I think there is another issue.
I am pretty sure that seeing photos of their victims in the papers spurs gangs on to committing increasingly violent and sadistic murders, with the objective of seeing their handy work in the paper. How do you combat that? I do remember that at the height of hooliganism in English football in the 80’s, the TV companies became aware that hooligans were selecting matches televised live, so that they could watch their rioting at home on video later.
They turned their cameras away from the hooligans and put on the commentators would chat for how ever long the violence lasted about how childish, sad and generally dumb they were. Not quite the result or public image the hooligans hoped for. Did it stop hooliganism? Nope. But I’m sure it helped in the general battle.