Christchurch attacks: what should responsible reporting look like?

By Micha Frazer-Carroll

Updated May 19, 2020 at 01:53 PM

Reading time: 2 minutes

After the news of the Christchurch terror attack broke, it was shocking but not surprising to see the tabloid press exposing the most sensitive parts of the tragedy. In this case, this was visual: both the Daily Mail and the Sun’s websites featured the live-streamed footage of the shootings themselves. The Sun also included an animated GIF of the video on its homepage, which becomes all the more troubling and abhorrent when we remember that it’s the U.K.’s most widely read newspaper.

In her book, Regarding the Pain of Others, Susan Sontag discusses the politics of what it means to look at tragedy, both in the literal, visual sense, and also to read about and engage with it. Sontag says that to regard tragedy more broadly is to read about it, and engage with details of it. Beyond the visual realm, it’s notable that the Mail also allowed readers to download the manifesto of the terrorist attackers, encouraging readers to engage in a type of looking that wasn’t directive of prescriptive (will they be looking out of curiosity? To scrutinise? To become radicalised?). Even if editors had their own idea of why readers should engage with it, it’s worth considering that once the artefact is out in the world to be looked at, they may not have control of how it is used.

But attack after attack, tragedy after tragedy, violence upon violence, outlets that go far beyond the right wing press must continually reflect and interrogate what responsible reporting looks like. For me, the Sun and the Mail are examples on the extreme end of the spectrum, as there’s no doubt in my mind there has been a historical institutional judgement that clicks are more important than respect for the dead. What’s more, their editorial decisions fit into a wider trend of continued racist and Islamophobic reporting. But what about our ‘responsible’ outlets? We should be critical of the calls that are made in how black and brown bodies are portrayed in cases of violence—not to mention acknowledging when reporting has been done responsibly.

Images of grief, as demonstrated in The Guardian but also commonly in the New York Times, go a long way in articulating the gravitas of a tragedy without dehumanising those whose lives have been lost. During the peak of the Black Lives Matter movement, the New York Times opted for images of tributes, vigils, flowers and cards, and the BBC has also overwhelmingly used this narrative technique to articulate the grief after Christchurch. Showing images of protests—as seen by the comprehensive video coverage of the movement by the Guardian—can also convey that we should be angry, without having to show graphic detail of violence itself. In images where grievers are distressed, it’s important that these are consensually captured with the subjects’ knowledge, as otherwise journalists run the same risk of objectification and stripping autonomy of those in pain. Eyewitness accounts, which were also used by the Guardian in the wake of Christchurch, can equally responsibly explain events from the perspective of victims and survivors, which gives power back to them in how tragedies are told.

The fault lines between necessary and sensationalised information can be blurry, and decisions often need to be made about what will best explain the gravitas of a tragedy with due respect. In one of the Guardian’s first pieces of coverage on the Christchurch attack, it ran a headline with the quote “I saw people drop dead”, which could be deemed as emotive rather than unacceptably graphic. Both the Atlantic and Vox also ran coverage that discussed the content of the attacker’s manifesto, despite not hosting it in its entirety.

It is not always clear cut. However, the fact that these questions may be difficult to navigate shouldn’t deter outlets, and the general public, from continually posing them. We must be critical of how tragedy is relayed to us—what we should see, and what should go unseen.

Micha Frazer-Carroll is arts and culture editor at gal-dem and writes for HuffPost U.K.

Keep On Reading

By Alma Fabiani

King Charles III diagnosed with cancer, Buckingham Palace confirms

By Louis Shankar

The TV finales that saved 2023, and the ones that royally ruined it

By Abby Amoakuh

Ice Spice fans hit back at online trolls following no-makeup selfie hate

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Lego urges California police department to stop using its toy heads for mugshot images

By Abby Amoakuh

From techno string quartets to thrifted dresses, Gen Z weddings are on the rise

By Charlie Sawyer

How to sell feet pics: Breaking down the side hustle helping Gen Zers pay their rent

By Abby Amoakuh

Tory Crispin Blunt might be the latest MP accused of sexual misconduct, but he isn’t the first

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Gen Z on TikTok are quitting vaping in solidarity with Congo

By Charlie Sawyer

Actor Jamie Dornan guiltily admits to stalking women in London. Here’s why

By Charlie Sawyer

The UK Conservative government is out to get the entire LGBTQIA+ community. Here’s how

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Friends co-stars and family pay heartfelt tribute to late Matthew Perry

By Charlie Sawyer

Understanding the sneaky link: Meaning of the dating trend beyond the hook-up

By Abby Amoakuh

Men are warming up to lip fillers and finding more than just one use for the injections

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

The click-clack of anticapitalism: How London’s youth took over the Lime bike

By Charlie Sawyer

Kill them all, US Congressman Andy Ogles tells activist when asked about Gaza

By Fleurine Tideman

Revving my engines: Can women find F1 drivers sexy and simultaneously enjoy the sport?

By Abby Amoakuh

Nella Rose faces backlash following explosive fight with Fred Sirieix on I’m a Celebrity

By Abby Amoakuh

Sydney Sweeney claps back at TikTok scammer who pretended to be her dietitian

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Influencer Chiara Ferragni issues apology amid €1M fine for misleading charity Christmas cake sale

By Charlie Sawyer

Ron DeSantis’ obsession with the anti-woke agenda ruined his chances of becoming president