If I had been asked I would have said that
it would be appropriate to be descriptive

but not graphic. So that euphemism as a device,
as a writer's device, as a journalistic device

is just as effective and in some
instances may be more powerful.

But I think that the public has the right
to know but does not have the right to

indulge and that becomes a difficult choice for journalists. I think what the problem with visuals

in news is that we tend as journalists to want
to see how close to the edge we can go before

someone stops us. Whether it's our bosses or
our conscience or the public and I think that

in my experience in newsrooms news organizations
are constantly saying how much can we get away

with. Now they may not say it quite so openly as that but that's always the implication. Can

we put this on the air without grossing out our
viewers and I think that that has become part of

the problem especially in a highly competitive era that we find ourselves in. In which the financial

uh and audience underpinnings of support
have been taken away, mostly by the internet.