Strollerderby

I know that the death toll was the point of this story,  but I could have done without seeing the bodies of small children without any warning at the top of the page.

i second that kris.

I agree.  What is wrong with you?  Those poor (now expolited) babies.

Really really could have done without the picture of the young children.  I absolutely am appalled at what's happening in the world right now, but I never expected Babble to post this gruesome picture without some kind of warning and posting "below the fold".  I've always respected Babble for being sensitive, while also reporting on difficult issues.  Please at least put the pic below the fold if you feel strongly about posting it...

I agree with Kris, Maeby, and Kelly -- the photo is disturbing...

but not because you posted it, but because what's happening is disturbing.  To talk  about it as an abstract death toll would not effect readers the same way a visual image does.  Your readers' responses make that very point, don't they?  The video that you linked is incredibly sad, and hard to watch, but it is moving far beyond words.  Thanks for confronting us with the real news of the day.

Will be praying for those children's families, and for an end to all the violence in the region. It could be any of our children in that photo, and any of us desperate with grief and fear.

I'll second Cole.  This is happening, right now, in the world.  Looking at the picture upsets me (as I'm sure it would anyone), but if I'm ever feeling shocked or overwhelmed I stop to think about what it must feel like for the parents/families/friends of those pictured and realize I don't have it even half as tough just from seeing the picture.

If it upsets you, do something about it.  Do something (anything) to help the people affected - it doesn't have to be political, it can be charitable instead.  But asking a website not to show the picture just isn't going to change a damn thing except that you're not going to feel as bad, and sorry, but like I said - any suffering you experience from seeing the picture isn't half what the people involved are experiencing.

My previous comment was about the photo you had up this morning -- not the one that's up now.  But this too makes the point --- the photo you have up now is  of post bomb rubble, something we've seen dozens of times and is not nearly as affective as the "wake-up call" effect of the first photo .   Maybe strollerderby could host a discussion on visual images of kids .... just a thought.

This comment thread does bring to mind questions about the role of Babble and Strollerderby, and what it sees its role as being versus what its readership wants.  The previous photo is certainly appropriate for a hard news site.  Is Strollerderby that?  I'm not arguing it is or isn't.  Is Strollerderby's perceived mandate to make sure we are confronted with the news of the day, and how we are affected by it as parents?  Or is to be a little lighter, more entertainment mixed with information?  Again, I'm not suggesting that it is one thing or the other, just posing the question.

I hope we can all agree that because something horrible is happening right now is not justification enough to show images of that horrible something just anywhere.  They wouldn't be appropriate in the middle of kids' programming, for example.  There are lines.  But where they get fuzzy is where it's not clear what the site is trying to do.  Based on the comments left above, it seems like most people do not come here to be confronted with the ugly realities of war, and therefore that picture was a bit shocking.  I don't think it's fair to those readers to suggest they have their heads in the sand necessarily; it may have been only that the picture was upsetting in the context of what they have come to expect from Strollerderby. I think the picture was a little out of the norm for this site (though it didn't upset me to see it here, any more than that it is an upsetting image to be confronted with anywhere).  The question is whether it serves Babble's idea of what it wants to accomplish with this site?  Is Strollerderby interested in being the wake up call that Cole seems to suggest it is, or should be?

Not sure that my post here is all that clear, but it's been an interesting discussion.

Just have to second Cole AGAIN.  I was disappointed to see the picture changed.  I understand striking an ethical balance with what you show, but I don't think it's such a bad idea to expose people to what is *actually* happening - and not just the structural damage done to a building.

The conflict will never end as long as Hamas lobs rockets into Israel with the sole purpose of killing Israelis. I'm with Obama. If someone were tossing deadly rockets at my kids, I'd be doing everything I could to stop it. Why is there always an outcry when Israel does something to defend itself, yet no one says anything when these bombs are continually being launched into Israel. And those cowardly terrorists don't care about the people in Gaza. Hamas deliberately puts its officials and weapons into homes with civilians and children because they think Israel won't bomb those locations. If the Arab nations want the Palestinians to have a homeland, why don't any of them offer a large chunk of the massive territory they have? Bottom line, the land in question has been Israel's for thousands of years. Don't lose sight of the truth.

SueHawk said: "If someone were tossing deadly rockets at my kids, I'd be doing everything I could to stop it."

Would you drop deadly bombs on their kids (and all the kids in their neighbourhood) to stop it?  Do you really think that is OK?

The real question is do you REALLY I mean REALLY want a picture of YOUR dead kid on the internet!?  The argument I guess could be made, yes, if it helps stop violence.  But to me that picture is intrusive to the parents grief,  we have no idea if they had a say in the matter of taking it or posting it.  

Reading the mission statement here I do not see this site as a "hard hitting" investigative news source and I certainly do not come here for that type of news.

Great discussion so if the picture got that going, good. It might be helpful to give a warning. I think it was the shock that people object to? Given a warning, people could at least have a minute to think about it. Also, question...

Sue Hawk said: "the land in question has been Israel's for thousands of years"  I'll research more later, but is this true?

Ya know I love Obama, but I hope this tax package does not backfire.  We are in dire economic times with no perfect answers.

I had to sneak over to your blog to see the original picture.  Denial is a dangerous thing, I think the original picture was more appropriate.  The first picture is disturbing only because the truth hurts.

On Jett.  I am crying just typing this.  A friend of mine lost her daughter under similar circumstances.  Jett`s medical history is none of our business.  The cause of death is none of our business.  He is dead.  John and Kelly have to bury their son.  Explaining the cause makes it no less tragic.  

"Why is there always an outcry when Israel does something to defend itself, yet no one says anything when these bombs are continually being launched into Israel."

Are you serious, SueHawk? Have you watched any American news lately? EVERYONE is saying that Israel is right to do whatever it must. I simply don't see what you're talking about. The discussion has been unfairly one-sided, but not on the side you're suggesting.