Do you think it is appropriate to show combat footage on TV?

I think it’s Very Appropriate.
Uncouth? Unpleasant for the viewing audience? Compared to the experience of the people on the ground it is nothing.

War is hell, and we should know exactly what kind of pain and destruction we are dispensing onto the ground with these air strikes. There may be good reasons to use such weapons but we should know well what we’re doing with them.

TV news is unnecessary, and its primary purpose is entertainment. There’s really no reason people can’t read about what is going on. The amount of information transfer that is possible during a nightly “news” broadcast is a fraction of what is possible via interactive reading and research.

But there is something about visual input that can really get us caught in a way that writing can’t. News “stories” have names (“Terror in Twightlight” or some horseshit), graphics, and theme songs. We’re being manipulated in a way that a movie manipulates us. Most of the information is nonverbal.

If they are going to show combat footage on tv, they should show the whole thing. Want to show a missile launching from miles away or witness an explosion? Fine. Now go talk to the people who have been affected by these actions. There should not be any consideration of “too graphic”.

@hominid “TV news…entertainment” there’s some truth.
The only somewhat objective video coverage I see is on BBC or Al Jezeera English Edition.

“Show the whole thing” amen!

Why not? Reality (that is, actual battle footage) can’t be much worse than the filmed stuff that shows up in TV shows and fictional movies.

Thanks all. For the record I think it is entirely appropriate also, but some perspective was needed since I take the time to expose myself to the often awful things going on in the world. I work with some sensitive souls, which makes some of my opinions seem extreme in contrast.

I don’t think it is inappropriate. Who watches though, should be decided by each individual for themselves, or by parents for kids.
My boys were little guys when they showed on the news the guided missle which got nicknamed the Avon Lady bomb. It was amazing to see the technology at work which let them pick a target so well it could go right in the front door of a bunker. I thought with the ability to do that, civilians could at last be left alone during combat. I would be living with that delusion if it weren’t for the coverage journalists continue to bring us.
War is unpleasant, upsetting, cruel, I could add adjectives all day. It is something the public should be aware of. It helps us to know more about which leaders we want to follow, which policies we can believe.
I allowed my children to view certain things down through the years, but not all. I thought they should have an understanding that our house was not the universe, and things go on which we can’t see from our block. I didn’t want to scar them though, so I tried to be selective about just what they saw.
There is accountability to think of as we view such things. There is also the human factor. Refugees, veterans, and those who love either can be better understood, maybe more sympathy can be found for some souls, by seeing what they have faced first hand.

If there is sufficient warning so that PTSD people can look away or get away. I think it’s important that civilians get a realistic and unvarnished, unsterilized look at war. How long stretches of tedium punctuated by moments of abject terror looks. And why some suffer so long after it is over.

Yes. The brutality of war should be apparent to everyone.

I don’t think any specific details of the military should be shown or told.

I’m sure all footage is previewed by the government before it’s released, @UnholyThirst.

Some footage yes, overkill no.
I don’t need to see a picture of pools of blood in the gutter to be able to perfectly well imagine what horrors are taking place. Same goes for animal cruelty/abuse. I don’t need to see the dog that someone set on fire.

Anyone with even a feeble degree of imagination and intelligence can relate without graphic imagery IMO.
So what, I see something horrific and feel horrible about it, what does it change? Not a damn thing.

Yes I think it’s necessary. A picture is worth a thousand words. The films produced by journalists during World War 1, 2 and other wars document the events that occurred. We should not be protected from the reality of war. We can’t be allowed to be oblivious to what is happening in the world and especially when those events are being sanctioned by our governments, in our names. When broadcast, it should be accompanied with a warning if it’s likely to cause distress.

As to seeing something horrible not changing things, I disagree. These and these are some examples of photograph that have influenced public opinion and in some cases, government policy. Visual images (including video) can definitely change attitudes and the course of history. As we watch Hong Kong protestors now, I know I have this film film in the back of my mind.