Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (June 22, 2004)
Newsroom: (541) 346-5511 Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union P.O. Box3159, Eugene, OR97403 E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com Online: www.dailyemerald.com Tuesday, June 22, 2004 COMMENTARY Editor in Chief: Jared Paben Managing Editor: Travis Willse E DITORI AI Media should not publish photos of decapitation Whoever said the mainstream media are full of vultures thirst ing for lurid front-page gore ought to reconsider their stance. Al-Qaida terrorists have paraded photographs and videos of the decapitations of Americans Nick Berg and Paul M. John son, Jr. for the world to see, but the media, for the most part, have not played their game. They've shown restraint. They haven’t put grotesque photographs that will nauseate adults on page one and they've refrained from putting horrifying video that will haunt children's nightmares on the 6 p.m. news. To their credit, they've told us the news of these horrible deeds without offendingour sensibilities. Simply put, there is no good reason to publish a photo of a decapitated human in a newspaper. In no reasonable case would a photograph like that add to a reader's understanding of a story; instead, it would only repulse them. Some might argue that people need to see these images to keep the tragedy of these situations from sinking into unconsciousness. Consider this: What about those who already understand the seriousness of the issue, the terrible nature of these inhuman crimes? They turn the page and are forced to see something most people find offensive. Readers can stop reading a stoiy anytime, but nobody can 'unsee' a photo found to be disturbing. Moreover, there is nothing trivializing about seeing a photo graph of a living person moments before he's decapitated. In some ways, it might even be more powerful. All readers will use their imaginations, and probably feel outrage at these terrorists' crimes and deep sympathy for the families of the victims. The Emerald Editorial Board supports completely the right of any news organization to run a photo of a severed head. That's freedom of speech and restrictions would constitute cen sorship, plain and simple. But we don't think newspapers and television should show these images. That is where the Internet comes in. These images are avail able for those with morbid curiosities or twisted senses of humor. Many Web sites, including the Drudge Report, have placed dis claimers and links in front of this material so that discerning surfers can see or ignore it at will, and little lohnny doesn't stum ble across it while looking for http://www.sesamestreet.com. This is the way it should be. Maybe media vultures have consciences, or maybe they realize dinner lies on a busy eight-lane freeway and touching it means a hail storm of angry phone calls and subscription cancellations. Either way, they've shown restraint and responsibility. EDITQRIAt.POLICY This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. Responses can be sent to letters @dailyemerald.com. Letters to the editor and guest commentaries are encouraged. Letters are limited to 250 words and guest commentaries to 550 words. Authors are limited to one submission per calendar month. Submission must include phone number and address for verification. The Emerald reserves the right to edit for space, grammar and style. NEWS BRIEF Emerald sports changes, begins twice-weekly publication The Emerald is continually changing to serve its readers bet ter. Today's issue, the first of the summer, is the next step in that evolution. We're rolling out a cleaner, updated design that includes new fonts, centered headlines and new mug shot boxes, to name a few of the more noticeable changes. Also, we've re moved the strip across the bottom of the front page that in cluded the weather, contents and "Next issue" box, leaving more space for news stories. This will provide readers with more options when window shopping on the newsstands. This summer the Emerald will publish every Tuesday and Thursday, from June 22 to Aug. 12, and conclude regular sum mer publication with the Aug. 18 Law School edition. Look for special Game Day issues the day before home football games against Indiana (Sept. 11) and Idaho (Sept. 25), as well as our six-section September 20 "Back to the Books" issue. We hope to hear from you this summer. Feel free to contact the Emerald with news tips, letters to the editor, questions or concerns by calling the office at (541) 346-5511, stopping by EMU Suite 300 or by e-mailing Editor in Chief jared Paben at editor@dailyemerald.com. — Jared Paben Yeah, some ^ of the scariest creatures have the smallest ^ brains. Wow, this Bush guy sure seems ^ scary... ^ Aaron Sullivan Illustrator BIG MAC ATTACK J. TOBIAS MONTRY COLUMNIST I love Big Macs. I think nice, juicy Big Macs are the best thing to happen since Internet porn. In my genius hierarchy, which is arguably jaded and flawed, it goes Albert Einstein, Hunter S. Thomp son, and then the man who brought us the untouchable Santa Claus of cheese burgers, the McDonald's Big Mac. But my obsession is no accident. After all, through these veins runs an invigorat ing stream of a Angus steak eatin', fast car drivin', foreign country invadin', red blooded tragedy of the American culture. For instance, I know for a fact that Big Macs are unhealthy, heart-attack inducing mounds of lard, but 1 just don't care. 1 also know that continued consumption of the Godfather ofgreaseburgers will inevitably result in my poor health. Still, I reserve the right in the rest of this column to be a complete hypocrite in that I will declare my love for the cheeseburger but decry legislation that would ultimately protea it from lawsuits. Let me explain: In March, the Republican-dominated U.S. House of Representatives overwhelm ingly passed a disastrous piece of legislation called HR 339, the so-called "Cheeseburg er Bill," which would effectively ban law suits blaming the food industry for expand ing waistlines and causing health problems. House Speaker Dennis Hasten, R-Ill., told CBS News shortly after the bill's pas sage that, "Trial lawyers need to stop en couraging consumers to blame others for the consequences of their actions just so they can profit from frivolous lawsuits against restaurants."The problem with this line of reasoning is that this country sadly includes consumers who honestly don't know that certain products are bad for them: Ever wonder why bottles of Drano J. TOBIAS MONTRY STOP BREEDING have warning labels saying, "Not suitable for Miller Time"? These same people are probably also first in line at the cigarette counter, but at least with tobacco products they get some fair warning: a label saying the product may lead to debilitating diseases. The surgeon general has yet to put a warning label on the Big Mac, however, and clearly when some body decides to get that next pack of smokes, he or she is ignoring government sanctioned warnings and decades of anti smoking publicity. But fatty, generally unhealthy foods? Where is the fair warning? Given that overeating is on the fast track to becoming the No. 1 preventable cause of death — poor diet and lack of physical activity resulted in 400,000 deaths in 2000, according to CBS — chances are much of the American public doesn't know the horrible secret: Some foods from some places are so obscenely un healthy that, as was demonstrated in the re cent documentary "Super Size Me," they can quickly lead to miserably poor health. Supporters of the bill say it will protect small businesses (i.e. places where food comes to you more than three minutes af ter you order it) from frivolous lawsuits that point a finger for obesity and subsequent poor health. However, Americans have been eating at "mom and pop" restaurants for generations, and the obesity and health problems have never before reached such epic proportions (no pun intended). So it's clear that fast food shops are probably the problem and that smaller restaurants are safe from such lawsuits anyway. Thus, the justification seems like a ploy to protect the corporate food industry. Speaking of which, did I mention that Congressman Ric Keller, the Florida Repub lican who sponsored the bill, received $22,200 from agribusiness during his 2004 race for Congress, according to http://www.openseaets.org? Yep, contribu tions poured in from Darden Restaurants (which represents several restaurants such as the Olive Garden and Red Lobster), Out back Steakhouse, Wal-Mart, Pizza Hut and — wait for it — the National Restaurant As sociation! This is probably why the bill is written to include protection for ANY food distribution, not just fast food. Keller may not be all bad, however. For the sake of full disclosure, he also received a sizable chunk of money from lawyers — not exactly the kind of people who are set to benefit from such a bill. The moral of the story is that here in the good of U.S. of A., it doesn't sit right when the federal government decides that certain lawsuits are frivolous even before a judge or jury can see them. In a letter of dissent of the legislation, several lawmakers wrote that "It is inappropriate for the Majority to deny harmed parties their rights in the complete absence of any evidence that the courts are not processing the cases before them in a just and equitable manner." The bill has yet to hit the U.S. Senate. Un til then, I'll be eating a Big Mac and feeling sorry for the poor sucker sitting behind me who doesn't know fast food is going to kill him. Soon, he won't have any chance at ret ribution, anyway. /. Tobias Montry: jantnontry@dailyetnerald.com. ONLINE POLL 2 THIS WEEK’S POLL RESULTS What was the biggest story covered by the Emerald this year? (61 votes) 1. Multnomah county issues same sex marriage licenses 45.9 percent 2. Squirrel fishing 18.0 percent 3. DPS officer committed miscon duct 8.2 percent 4. Alleged assault by ASUO Vice President Eddy Morales 6 6 percent 5. Sports arena put on hold 6 6 percent 6. Weiden workshop 6.6 percent 7. Goldschmidt sex scandal 3.3 per cent 8. Los Angeles Times Editor John Carroll lecture 3.3 percent 9. Diversity provost coverage 16 percent NEXT WEEK’S QUESTION Should media organizations show the graphic photos of the beheaded corpse of U.S. hostage Paul Johnson? Visit www.dailyemerald.com to vote. • Yes — The images make the violence more real and understandable • Yes — It’s the media’s job to inform the public, regardless of how graphic • No — The images are distasteful • No — It brings publicity to the murderers
