Has social media made the news media more insensitive toward violence? Is it the FOMO factor?
Before social media became our constant companion, depiction of violence on news was the exception—graphic visuals were either not shown on TV or in newspapers or the images were blurred to avoid identification and lessen the impact on readers/viewers.
No longer: Think of the Russian war in Ukraine, Israel’s Gaza koonwar, and the Hamas attack: we have seen dead babies and adults, critically injured children—even some emaciated with food deprivation—bodies strewn on the streets, homes destroyed…Anything and everything can and is now shown.
Most of these disturbing visuals are sourced from citizens, who post their recordings on social media. These are then then picked up by the news media.
The latest reminder of human inhumanity, a terrorist attack in Moscow, 22 March, saw 137 people die and 182 others injured. The news media and social media had images of flames engulfing the Crocus City Hall, people running for cover in all directions, and terrorists shooting at sight—but we didn’t see too many gory details of the dead; just rubble, rubble, dust to dust…
Also read: Gujarat University violence—Indian news channels focus on ‘slap’; BBC, Al Jazeera on ‘namaz’
Celebrating violence
However, the same cannot be said for coverage of the alleged torture of four captured attackers by the Russian security forces.
Here, the social media has driven the news media in fourth gear.
Video grabs and photographs have shown us the four men “bashed and battered…” (The Washington Post) brought into court, Sunday, and placed inside glass containers—that made them look like exhibits in a museum.
“Black eye, Swollen face, Ear Bandaged, Bones Broke,” wrote The Times of India on its YouTube story.
But why were we being shown the men in close-ups and given graphic details of the injuries? Because videos had flooded social media—and the news media had to take note.
The men were on display, like war trophies, or so we were told. Stories in several international media outlets said violence was being celebrated in Russia, even normalised.
And, although media organisations could not verify the videos taken from social media, they were considered genuine since they were sourced to Telegram channels apparently close to Russian authorities, said several news organisations.
“Videos of brutal interrogation sessions were apparently leaked by Russian security forces,” wrote BBC.
“The videos, which appeared on pro-Kremlin Telegram channels, were geolocated by Russian media to the time and place of the arrests in the western Bryansk region,” added The Washington Post.
The Guardian (UK) identified a particular source: ChK-OGPU, a Telegram account that “regularly leaks information from the Russian intelligence services”. The channel said that “military personnel in the border guard cut off (a suspect’s) ear.”
As for the Ukrainian press, it did not hesitate to identify the origins of the videos: “Russian propaganda channels post photos and videos of Moscow terror attack suspects being tortured,” wrote Ukrainska Pravda..
Another Ukraine newspaper, The Kyiv Independent, claimed that “Margarita Simonyan, a Russian propagandist and head of the state-owned media outlet RT, shared pictures of the alleged suspects in court, showing clear signs of abuse.”
Unverified but so what
The images of torture on public display showed the Russian attitude to such violence, and the lack of compunction when it came to brutal tactics, argued media houses.
The Guardian claimed those who tortured the men won state award—“The Russian authorities are no longer shy about showing that its security services torture people. There are no window dressing exercises any more…”
The New York Times said, “Though the goriest clips were not shown on (Russian) state television, the brutal treatment of the defendants was made clear. And the decision by the Russian authorities to showcase it so publicly in court, in a way they had almost never done before, was intended as a sign of revenge and a warning to potential terrorists, analysts said.”
And while Western news outlets were critical of the Russian authorities and the Russian media for what they saw as gloating over the “torture and severe abuse…” (The Washington Post) of the accused men, their own coverage left little to the imagination, in words or visuals.
Read this from The New York Times: “One of the most disturbing videos showed one defendant… having part of his ear sliced off and shoved in his mouth. A photograph circulating online showed a battery hooked up to the genitals of another, Shamsidin Fariduni, while he was being detained…”
Or this from The Guardian: “After his arrest, Shamsidin Fariduni appeared in a photo lying on the floor of a school gym, his pants pulled down around his knees and with wires connected his genital area. The photograph… suggested Fariduni had been shocked with 80 volts and water had been poured over his body to “intensify the effect”.”
PBS (US) said the four men showed “signs of severe beatings. One appeared to be barely conscious during the hearing…” in a Moscow court, Sunday.
Other media outlets such as The Washington Post, Associated Press, Reuters, and BBC had similar details of the alleged torture. AP said they could not verify the authenticity of the videos on social media – but that didn’t stop them from describing their contents.
Nameless ‘Russian media’
Another curiosity of the international media coverage was that they saw the Russian media as one big behemoth without names or individuals. Reports would attribute information to one, general, “the Russian media”.
“Russian media had reported that the men were tortured during interrogation by the security services… wrote PBS.
“Russian media had reported that the men were tortured during interrogation by the security services and unverified and brutal videos of the suspects’ interrogations have been circulating on social media..” said Al Jazeera.
And CBS (US TV channel) said: “…Russian media reported that the four were tortured while being interrogated, raising questions about whether their pleas might have been coerced.”
The increase in the portrayal and depiction of violence has spread from fact to fiction. Films and serials on OTT channels depict more violence more violently. Think of any police show or film, watch Fighter Hritik Roshan beat up the enemy—it’s all blood-curdling stuff.
The alleged torture of the Moscow terrorist incident attackers and the manner in which it has been apparently celebrated in Russia, is just another `dishum-dishum’ moment.
The author tweets @shailajabajpai. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)