Beheadings for Breakfast?

Recognizing how easy it is to become desensitized and callous as Facebook changes its policy on showing beheadings
October 30, 2013 Updated: October 30, 2013

Facebook struck what it thought was a blow for freedom of expression: it is now going to allow beheadings to be seen in its newsfeeds.

Said the house of the billionaire Zuckerberg, “Since some people object to graphic video of this nature, we are working to give people additional control over the content they see. This may include warning them in advance that the image they are about to see contains graphic content.”

I am sure this oh-so-reasonable distinction without a difference is being celebrated at this very moment in some cave in Afghanistan by the crazies who delight in chopping off heads as acts of terror. 

They do it so that their handiwork will be seen. Facebook is ready to oblige them in the name of giving their members more control over the means of shocking others.

How nice.

Earlier, when its decision was roundly condemned, it qualified its pro-gore fatwa in this age of zombie lovers everywhere, and just in time for Halloween, to put a liberal face on a decision that makes chopping off faces more visible. 

Article Continues after the discussion. Vote and comment

[tok id=6da45567035594cf7c18792ba86aaa0 partner=1966]

It said with a straight face and no sense of irony that these grotesque uber-violent videos would only be allowed if they are condemned as atrocities or shown as news.

Making Atrocities Cool

Before you vote “like,” consider that the effect is going to make cool atrocities that are likely to gross people out, or legitimize the practice, or desensitize viewers.

I produced a human rights TV series, “Rights & Wrongs,” for four years. Originally, we sought out videos that showed abuses on the theory that they would outrage viewers and lead to more support for human rights protection.

What we found is that many in the audience turned away, were shocked, or disgusted, only to become more alienated and stop watching.

Many saw it as exploitative.

Their sensibilities and sense of humanity was violated. The images overshadowed the information we offered at the same time.

We later learned that they much preferred stories about human rights heroes who challenged violations and opposed brutality.

Not everyone views violence as negative especially in a society where, as onetime civil rights leader H. Rap Brown said, “Violence is as American as cherry pie.”

Popular video games, films, and TV shows are overloaded with violent imagery. Violence is accepted and now it looks beheadings will be, too.

Gross sells!

Becoming Accustomed to Violence and Brutality

A new movie on slavery, “12 Years A Slave” offers unrelieved scenes of blacks being beaten, whipped, lynched, and killed.

The point, you would think, is to show how awful slavery is.

But there seems to be unintended consequences too, as black movie critic Armond White explains in a review that suggests what we are watching is really torture porn.

He writes, “These tortures might satisfy the resentment some Black people feel about slave stories (‘It makes me angry’), further aggravating their sense of helplessness, grievance–and martyrdom.

“…And the perversion continues among those whites and non-Blacks who need a shock fest like ‘12 Years a Slave’ to rouse them from complacency with American racism and American history. But, as with ‘The Exorcist,’ there is no victory in filmmaking this merciless. (The slave’s) travail merely make it possible for some viewers to feel good about feeling bad.”

He believes that films like this accustom moviegoers to accepting violence and brutality.

Effects of Pornography

Back in 2011 Facebook was spammed by vicious pornographic images. Its security people did not welcome them, but worked hard to remove them. 

Redeye reported then, “Graham Cluley, a consultant with Web security firm Sophos, said that ‘explicit and violent’ images had been flooding the news feeds of Facebook users for the past 24 hours or so including hardcore porn; Photoshopped images of celebrities, including teen pop star Justin Bieber, in sexual positions; ‘extreme violence’; and at least one image of an abused dog.”

Disgusting, right? 

Do we want our children or even adults exposed to this avalanche of sleaze? 

But somehow, now that Facebook has liberalized its privacy rules for teenagers, it thinks about access to beheadings as a new right. 

We know that hardcore porn begets more hardcore porn with the truly deranged among us often anxious to imitate what they have seen.

One witness at a Senate hearing some years back testified that pornography “increases the likelihood of sexual addiction. … Sexual addicts also develop tolerance and will need more and harder kinds of pornographic material.”

Video games like the best selling “Grand Theft Auto” help viewers show what it is like to torture someone.

An essay on MercatorNet warned, “Don’t let the ‘virtual’ nature of the torture deceive you. A conscious decision to inflict sadistic cruelty is more than just a mind game; it damages the soul and the psyche of the cyber-torturer. Consider what happens interiorly when the player realizes that he or she must ‘become’ the torturer in order to move successfully to the next level.”

Tradition and the Lowest Common Denominator

Beheadings are now a subject fit for dinner table discussion.

Wikipedia entry explains: “Decapitation has been used as a form of capital punishment for millennia. The terms ‘capital offence,’ ‘capital crime,’ ‘capital punishment,’ derive from the Latin caput, ‘head,’ referring to the punishment for serious offenses involving the forfeiture of the head; i.e., death by beheading.

“Decapitation by sword (or axe, a military weapon as well) was sometimes considered the honorable way to die for an aristocrat, who, presumably being a warrior, could often expect to die by the sword in any event; in England it was considered the privilege of noblemen to be beheaded.”

So I guess there is a tradition here that is coming back into acceptability. Is this progress?

Lest you think that only Muslim madman cut heads off, remember that during the Vietnam War, many desensitized U.S. servicemen collected enemy ears as trophies. Everyday, there are bizarre crimes that force TV reporters to use euphemisms to report.

We saw how the U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison came up with perversions from the dark side of the American imagination. Interrogators involved in these crimes were never punished, just low-level soldiers.

Some tribes were known for shrinking heads to preserve them. Is that why the drug culture embraced “heads” too?

Television specializes in “talking heads.”

In this cultural environment, networks try to out-shock each other in pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Next, we may have beheadings in prime time in the name of fun and higher ratings.

I can’t wait.

That’s a joke. And not a good one.

I was on Al-Jazeera TV last week making the argument on the air that I argue in this commentary. I was happy to note, “Al-Jazeera has already stated: ‘Al-Jazeera has never and will never broadcast a beheading. Our journalism upholds the strictest guiding principles of accuracy, impartiality, and objectivity.’”

I wish other outlets would follow its lead.

News Dissector Danny Schechter blogs at newsdissector.net. He edits Mediachannel.org. Comments to dissector@mediachannel.org He is on Twitter at @Danny Schechter

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Danny Schechter
Danny Schechter