5 ms·

I think the very fact that reading those descriptions is confronting, if it is to you as it is to me, is evidence that you do need exposure to understand that h

I think the very fact that reading those descriptions is confronting, if it is to you as it is to me, is evidence that you do need exposure to understand that horrible things happen in the world. I understand it academically, but every time I see or read something like this I realise that I don't really understand it.

buryat 5y ago
it's just sick entertainment covered by explanation "I need to see how horrible the world is", and being the audience you create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives. There're better ways to educate yourself and make the world a better place.
- philosopher1234 5y ago
  This seems too reductionist. It can both be sick entertainment and educational and socially valuable at the same time.
- wyattpeak 5y ago
  On the contrary, I don't find it entertaining at all. In fact I generally can't bring myself to watch LiveLeak videos, those text descriptions are my limit. But I do think my understanding of such situations is poorer for not doing so.
- jamestimmins 5y ago
  After the photojournalist James Foley was beheaded by Isis, I read a thoughtful editorial arguing that we shouldn't watch it, in part because people were ultimately doing it not to become more informed, but to test their ability or willingness to stomach it. It also argued, that ultimately this was a form of entertainment. To address the argument that we should "see how horrible the world is", I think it's worth asking why that's necessary? What will it change, beyond making it harder to sleep? Further, there's always something worse you can see, so should we go on trying to fund ever more horrible videos to watch? What is gained by watching something live that isn't gained simply by reading about it or reflecting on injustices without becoming voyeurs to people's horrors?
  - wyattpeak 5y ago
    I think what's gained is a visceral appreciation for such events which prompts further action. There's a reason why, when spruiking for donations, organisations like UNICEF like to show pictures of suffering children, and read first-hand accounts. These are the things that motivate people to act. We're not perfectly rational beings. We're all well aware that there are poor and starving people in the world, and mostly we do nothing about it. It's that emotional reaction that prompts us to act. Reflecting on it instead might be sufficient, but if so then it's demonstrably not what people do, or else those pitches wouldn't be as successful as they are. That action, to me, is the point, and it comes in many forms. Some active, like for instance donating to a cause. Some passive, like changing opinions on an ongoing war that your country is party to. Sure, some people are watching it for entertainment value. Is that a big problem, if it changes opinions nevertheless? And from reading the other comments on this thread, I think it's apparent that it changes opinions.
  - spoonjim 5y ago
    I don’t think it’s entertainment any more than reading the news is entertainment. I know that LiveLeak for example changed my view on capital punishment. You can sit in a coffee shop and debate things but once you see a guy cut out another guy’s beating heart in front of his son (before doing the same to the son) you think, “they really ought to execute that guy.”
    - ticviking 5y ago
      It reminds us that in fact Evil does exist. And that despite it's flaws our society does an aweful lot to keep it from intruding into our lives. Seeing some of those things helped me understand why people in the past did such radical things to avoid capture.
- argc 5y ago
  I completely disagree with you, I've gotten absolutely zero enjoyment from the few that I've watched. They make me feel completely sick and scared for myself and my family. I am much more careful with my daughter and prone to take precautions though, after having watch them. I think they provide value, I absolutely do not get the same effect from reading or learning about bad things that can happen to me, my brain just never really considered it a real option until I saw it happen.
- techrat 5y ago
  > you create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives The way you phrase this makes it sound like you think people intentionally create these videos where people die just to post it to LiveLeak for people to be entertained by. A lot of it was stuff that was going to happen anyway that happened to be caught on film.
  - spoonjim 5y ago
    The things happening on LiveLeak would happen anyway but the videotaping wouldn’t happen without an audience.
    - techrat 5y ago
      > the videotaping wouldn’t happen without an audience. Utter bullshit and you know it. It didn't have an audience until it was uploaded. By that point it was already recorded. People have always recorded events throughout history for as long as they were able to be recorded. Was the Hindenburg disaster recorded in the hopes that something awful would happen so it could 'have an audience'?
      - spoonjim 5y ago
        LOL, this is some kind of Poe’s Law thing. Anyhoo the reason that these cartel tortures are filmed is to send to the family and associates of the victim and others who would think of working against the cartel. The purpose is to scare the fuck out of anyone trying to disrupt or compete with the cartel. The audience is the only reason it is filmed. Before phones they would just leave the flayed head in the town square or similar.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
- modo_mario 5y ago
  >being the audience you create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives. What? Will we start more wars to provide it? Make workplaces, roads,etc less safe? Chances are this type of content has saved more lives than anything by making people more sensitised to what can happen and aware of things like workplace safety. There's something to be said about people seeing war and intervention as boring policy moves, not being able to stomach the thought of seeing where the meat they eat comes from for some reason and thinking about boring warning videos when thinking about workplace safety or a court case when thinking about drunk driving.
- brokenmachine 5y ago
  >create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives Unfortunately those humans are going to die and be maimed anyway. If those videos are out there, there's a chance of educating people on the danger of not paying attention crossing the road, or using a lathe, or throwing a firework into a sewer, or any of the million other mundane things that people do that don't seem super dangerous on first thought but actually are?

buryat 5y ago

it's just sick entertainment covered by explanation "I need to see how horrible the world is", and being the audience you create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives. There're better ways to educate yourself and make the world a better place.

philosopher1234 5y ago
This seems too reductionist. It can both be sick entertainment and educational and socially valuable at the same time.
wyattpeak 5y ago
On the contrary, I don't find it entertaining at all. In fact I generally can't bring myself to watch LiveLeak videos, those text descriptions are my limit. But I do think my understanding of such situations is poorer for not doing so.
jamestimmins 5y ago
After the photojournalist James Foley was beheaded by Isis, I read a thoughtful editorial arguing that we shouldn't watch it, in part because people were ultimately doing it not to become more informed, but to test their ability or willingness to stomach it. It also argued, that ultimately this was a form of entertainment. To address the argument that we should "see how horrible the world is", I think it's worth asking why that's necessary? What will it change, beyond making it harder to sleep? Further, there's always something worse you can see, so should we go on trying to fund ever more horrible videos to watch? What is gained by watching something live that isn't gained simply by reading about it or reflecting on injustices without becoming voyeurs to people's horrors?
- wyattpeak 5y ago
  I think what's gained is a visceral appreciation for such events which prompts further action. There's a reason why, when spruiking for donations, organisations like UNICEF like to show pictures of suffering children, and read first-hand accounts. These are the things that motivate people to act. We're not perfectly rational beings. We're all well aware that there are poor and starving people in the world, and mostly we do nothing about it. It's that emotional reaction that prompts us to act. Reflecting on it instead might be sufficient, but if so then it's demonstrably not what people do, or else those pitches wouldn't be as successful as they are. That action, to me, is the point, and it comes in many forms. Some active, like for instance donating to a cause. Some passive, like changing opinions on an ongoing war that your country is party to. Sure, some people are watching it for entertainment value. Is that a big problem, if it changes opinions nevertheless? And from reading the other comments on this thread, I think it's apparent that it changes opinions.
- spoonjim 5y ago
  I don’t think it’s entertainment any more than reading the news is entertainment. I know that LiveLeak for example changed my view on capital punishment. You can sit in a coffee shop and debate things but once you see a guy cut out another guy’s beating heart in front of his son (before doing the same to the son) you think, “they really ought to execute that guy.”
  - ticviking 5y ago
    It reminds us that in fact Evil does exist. And that despite it's flaws our society does an aweful lot to keep it from intruding into our lives. Seeing some of those things helped me understand why people in the past did such radical things to avoid capture.
argc 5y ago
I completely disagree with you, I've gotten absolutely zero enjoyment from the few that I've watched. They make me feel completely sick and scared for myself and my family. I am much more careful with my daughter and prone to take precautions though, after having watch them. I think they provide value, I absolutely do not get the same effect from reading or learning about bad things that can happen to me, my brain just never really considered it a real option until I saw it happen.
techrat 5y ago
> you create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives The way you phrase this makes it sound like you think people intentionally create these videos where people die just to post it to LiveLeak for people to be entertained by. A lot of it was stuff that was going to happen anyway that happened to be caught on film.
- spoonjim 5y ago
  The things happening on LiveLeak would happen anyway but the videotaping wouldn’t happen without an audience.
  - techrat 5y ago
    > the videotaping wouldn’t happen without an audience. Utter bullshit and you know it. It didn't have an audience until it was uploaded. By that point it was already recorded. People have always recorded events throughout history for as long as they were able to be recorded. Was the Hindenburg disaster recorded in the hopes that something awful would happen so it could 'have an audience'?
    - spoonjim 5y ago
      LOL, this is some kind of Poe’s Law thing. Anyhoo the reason that these cartel tortures are filmed is to send to the family and associates of the victim and others who would think of working against the cartel. The purpose is to scare the fuck out of anyone trying to disrupt or compete with the cartel. The audience is the only reason it is filmed. Before phones they would just leave the flayed head in the town square or similar.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
modo_mario 5y ago
>being the audience you create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives. What? Will we start more wars to provide it? Make workplaces, roads,etc less safe? Chances are this type of content has saved more lives than anything by making people more sensitised to what can happen and aware of things like workplace safety. There's something to be said about people seeing war and intervention as boring policy moves, not being able to stomach the thought of seeing where the meat they eat comes from for some reason and thinking about boring warning videos when thinking about workplace safety or a court case when thinking about drunk driving.
brokenmachine 5y ago
>create demand for future shock content at expense of human lives Unfortunately those humans are going to die and be maimed anyway. If those videos are out there, there's a chance of educating people on the danger of not paying attention crossing the road, or using a lathe, or throwing a firework into a sewer, or any of the million other mundane things that people do that don't seem super dangerous on first thought but actually are?