What is it that makes people want to look at graphic imagery following gruesome events, whether it be the fatal police shootings like the recent deaths of Philando Castile or Alton Sterling, or one of the many terrorist attacks that have struck internationally in the last month? America in particular seems to have a vested interest; in cases of police brutality, footage is practically required for any pretense of justice (though convictions almost never follow). When tragedies happen overseas, we seem to need visual proof in order to relate to these events. The terror attacks in Nice, France, saw more of these shocking yet familiar images circulated online. But this incident diverged from previous ones, with many authorities condemning this imagery out of respect to victims and their families. What can we learn from this?
There are many arguments why we should be more careful about disseminating this content without warning. Whether it's playing and re-playing Istanbul's Ataturk Airport attack on live television, or people sharing autoplayed graphic videos in others' feeds, perhaps we should stop and consider why we feel the need to share this imagery. What effects might it have on others, especially victims or groups affected by these tragedies?
What effects might it have on others, especially victims or groups affected by these tragedies?
Thursday at around 10:30 p.m. local time, tweets began pouring out of Nice, France, and expanded internationally as news became known: A man, later identified as Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, in what is presumed to be an act of terrorism, plowed a large truck through crowds gathered along a seaside promening during annual celebrations of Fete Nationale, commonly known elsewhere as Bastille Day. After stopping and exiting from his vehicle, he exchanged fire with police and was fatally shot. After his death, police found a cache of heavy weaponry in the truck but still had many unanswered questions. The death toll rose to 84 people overnight, with as many as 25 on life support and 52 in critical, life threatening condition.
Soon after initial information about the attack started circulating, images and videos of the attacks, whether during or in the aftermath, de throughout the internet. Some of these images did not show gory images of the wounded and dead; one from a German journalist showed a video of the truck from a building across the street, the vehicle picking up speed as it drove down the promenade. In others, you see the partially obscured truck, windshield riddled with bullet holes, or terrified droves of people running away from the promenade.
However, more gruesome imagery soon followed.
One of the earliest circulated videos circulated shows what someone sees while walking along the promenade, multiple bloody bodies littering the ground, with others trying to help those injured. Almost immediately after this video made the rounds, there were calls not to publicize it out of respect for the victims and their families, from French officials such as Secretary of State to the Prime Minister of France Juliette Meadel, France's Military Police Gendarmerie Nationale, and the Police Nationale.
The only other notable instance of gruesome imagery comes from media, with TV channel France2 airing an interview of a man as he was next to his wife's lifeless body. This clip is being criticized as too graphic, and could be seen as irresponsible of the channel to interview someone likely experiencing shock and grief; it does no justice for this man, his wife, or other victims of the attack.
Beyond disrespecting victims and their families, circulating graphic footage of potential terrorist attacks also feeds into the fear terrorist organizations hope to sow. These images can be used by organizations—related or otherwise to the attacks—to inspire further violence. We've already seen coordinated social media efforts in the attacks in Bangladesh, where attackers shared images, videos, and text while holding people hostage.
While there are calls from French officials not to share this kind of imagery, American media openly publicizes imagery of dead, dying, or injured black people in the epidemic of racism and police brutality.
Furthermore, these sorts of images can be traumatizing. While there are calls from French officials not to share this kind of imagery, American media openly publicizes imagery of dead, dying, or injured black people in the epidemic of racism and police brutality. In situations where people considered to be "other" are killed or gravely injured—black Americans, Syrian refugees, victims of terror in the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere—it's almost as if graphic footage is required as proof that these events actually happened.
Research has shown that regular viewing of violent imagery in the case of police brutality—and arguably, in the case of terror-related incidents—can result in what is referred to as “Vicarious Trauma” for those whose job it is to organize, edit, and aggregate such content.
France's officials were right in calling for a stop to broadcast featuring graphic imagery of the Nice terror attacks. American media and citizens can learn a thing or two from this response: circulating this footage without warning does nothing good, and there needs to be a middle ground of being more respectful to victims and conscientious of audiences. It's the most we can do for each other in the wake of this year's seemingly endless global tragedies.
