2012年3月、自らを狂信的イスラム擁護派と呼ぶMohammed Merahはフランスで7人を殺害する前に自らの胸にカメラを装着しました。Al-Jazeeraテレビ局はこの映像を放映しない決定をしたとJeff Howardが伝えます。
2012年3月11日から19日の間、自らを狂信的イスラム擁護派（ジハーディスト）と呼ぶアルジェリア系フランス人Mohammed Merahが、モンタバンとトゥルーズでフランス人軍人とユダヤ系児童を襲撃し、7人を殺害、5人を負傷させました。長引く立ち往生の末3月22日、パレスチナの子供たちのための復讐、そしてイスラム教徒に対するフランスの参戦への反対を主張するMerahをフランス警察は殺しました。Merahはアルカイダの一員だと公言していましたが、実際にテロ組織と関係があったかは未だに定かではありません。タリバンのパキスタン支部が彼を訓練したと最近主張しました。
襲撃から間もなく、射撃中に自らの胸にカメラを装着していたMerahが撮影した殺害のビデオをアラブ報道機関Al-Jazeeraが受け取りました。コーランからの引用節や宗教的音楽がこの映像のバックグラウンドに流れていました。被害者の家族は同機関にビデオの放映自粛を求め、ニコラ・サルコジフランス大統領もこう嘆願しました。「被害者の尊厳を守るため、そして我共和国の尊厳を守るため、どのようなことがあってもこのビデオを所持しているかもしれないすべてのテレビ局の管理者にこの映像を放映しないようにお願いしたい。」Al-Jazeeraは同機関の行動規範を理由に要望に応じ、このビデオは銃撃の音、叫び声、殺人犯と被害者の声以外すでに流れている情報を補足するもではないと主張しました。Al-Jazeeraの行動規範は「我々の視聴者、読者に当たり前の敬意を払い、明確、正確、そして真実に基づいた情報を提供するための注意をしながらすべての問題や記事を扱い、犯罪、戦争、迫害、災害の被害者、そしてそれら人々の家族の心情、個人のプライバシー、公共の品格を十分に察する」べきだとしています。
reply report Report comment
To the author opinion, it is patently wrong to describe murder as “objectively offensive”. One need only look as far as the glorification of violence in nearly all commercial media to see this. It is not only depictions of it that are popular; real life footage is hungrily devoured by voyeuristic viewers as well. For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsA9VtQ_uLg
The video has over 1,000,000 views, and an overwhelming “like” ratio. Why is it allowed? Is it because the victims are little white blobs? Is it because we cannot see their faces? They are the “bad guys” getting “what they deserve”?
This, to me, is far more disrespectful of identity and individualism than broadcasting murders. Picking and choosing which individual deserves respect undermines the entire argument to an extreme degree.
Perhaps the video related to the case study should not be aired on public television. Perhaps it should not be made available. But the reasoning behind this is inherently hypocritical, and disgusting at that.
reply report Report comment
From my personal point of view, i think that the omision of the footage was a totally right decision.
First of all i am totally agree about citizens getting freedom of speech and the most accurate information possible about anything that is relevant to anybody. But on the other hand, i think that the murder has been cover very good, as all the details have been explain. Furthermore, the information about the arrest and death of the terrorist has been covered very accuretaly.
Why i am against the diffusion of the video? First of all, most of the victims are kids, by this i mean that they are underage, therefore under the responsability of the parents. And which mother/father wants to recreate and live again the death of their kid? I think that it is not necessary and image or sound in this case. With some written information is enough.
Secondly, i think that the video could be a source of “Inspiration” for other terrorist attacks, and therefore i think we don’t need to do more publicity about the terrorist attack. Because everybody knows that positive/negative publicity is the best way to get known and increase the followers.
Finally, i think that besides those ideas, in order to respect the victims, it should be somehting private, for respecting their privacy and honor.
In conclusion, it was an excellent idea to ban the video, and i don’t see that the political pressure was something negative, at this moment i think it was an act showing respect for the victims. Sometimes is better to avoid information, because it is not going to add more details, but just some macabracy.