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.