There has been considerable debate in the last week about whether Olympics broadcaster NBC and other news outlets should have shown the video of the fatal crash involving Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili. To some, the video was not appropriate for television. To others, it was necessary to show the video because it was a significant news event.
I did not see the video on television, but almost saw the crash occur live online, as I happened to be watching some of the luge training runs that morning on NBC's Web site. I missed seeing Kumaritashvili's run by about 20 minutes.
After some internal debate throughout the day, I set out to find video of the crash online. My curiosity was partially morbid, but there was a genuine desire on my part to understand the circumstances of the accident.
I found the video on Huffington Post and watched it once. And then I logged onto Facebook and wrote as my status: "Don't watch the luge video. Just don't."
What struck me about the video was the speed of it all. I've seen videos of fatal ski accidents, car accidents and other tragedies. But this one bothered me because of how quickly the athlete flew off the ice surface and struck the metal support beam. Official accounts of the accident claim Kumaritashvili died upon arrival at the hospital, but my sense is that he was killed instantly.
In the days since the accident, my perspective on watching the video has changed a bit. My initial reaction was one of horror, and I found myself wishing I hadn't watch it and that there was a way to erase an image from my mind. But I have since watched the video two more times. Not because of a fascination with death, but because discussion of the accident had shifted toward trying to understand whether it was preventable. By watching it again, I was able to get a greater understanding of the track's speed, which had become some controversial. I was able to better grasp the physics that caused the luger to literally fly off his sled and off the track.
The key here, of course, is that I was able to watch the video on my terms. I voluntarily sought out the video and was forced to press play before watching and could have stopped it at any time. On a television broadcast, I would have been forced to close my eyes or turn away (thankfully, most news organizations warned viewers before playing the video.)
My personal feeling is that with the growth of the Internet, broadcasters no longer need to package every significant detail into their traditional television broadcasts. It is normal now for companies like NBC to supplement their newscasts, sports programming and scripted series with additional online content. The smartest approach for NBC would have been for anchor Bob Costas to explain the accident and its context, and then simply direct people to the Web site to find the video. Some critics might have argued NBC was using the video simply to create Web traffic, but the company could always have removed the video after 24 hours, knowing that anyone still wanting to see the crash could find it elsewhere on the Internet.
In the past, there was a valid argument for showing the most grisly truths during television broadcasts. Broadcasters might have gotten flak for showing something graphic, but not showing the hard truth would open them up to cries of censorship.
Now that there are alternative viewing platforms that provide greater control to the end user, broadcasters can afford to play it a bit safer.
Tim,
Well said! As always enjoy reading your fine work.
Cheers,
Posted by: Jim Williams | 02/15/2010 at 12:30 PM