While a good majority of people feel that reporters do a good job making sure we get the news on time, and that the news is honest, and newsworthy. I tend to feel that in the works something may be taken away from news reports. That is being able to report on stories, that could maybe incite a riot. Take for instance the report on the new evidence released that prisoners of war were being abused. This is on new pictures etc that were released.
Many are outraged that this was even going on. Because this has already been addressed in the past. Most took it as a lessen learned.
Reporters found more abuse pictures. Then reported the pictures. It has hit the papers, and 6 'o clock news again. Pictures so impaling, that even the worst of people would be shocked. (More of the same stuff)
Is this going to far? Would they have done better leaving out the camera shots, and just reported on just the facts? Are the news reporters adding to our demise? Do they need to have a heart on what the ramifications, or outcome too reporting such news can do to the public, and to a nation?
Even better maybe getting their facts together, and going to the proper authorities and reporting the new abuse, or new pictures found from the same time period.
A very fine line is among the evidence. First if they had of just gone to the proper authorities, would they of gotten the abuse to stop? Would the nation even of cared and did their best to hide the evidence? I am not even sure anymore on how guilty the ones were that were caught in the abuse in the first place from back then. It looks to me now this is being done not by the small none meaningless low level in-listed, but by the top brass. I also think that the low level in-listed may of been used as a scape goat. All of this new evidence was from 2003. Or so they say it is. Rather if it is or not, does the public have a right to see them? Do reporters have the right to publish them even if it can incite a riot? before you even answer this, be sure of what you are saying. Because your outcome can create one of two scenarios. One it can create news that hinders freedom of speech. Second if the news is not halted, then it can create even more war, and even riots. Which is worse?
I myself feel that its a "Be damned if you do, and be damned if you don't scenario."