Voyeur Nation

The McPherson Sentinel May 10, 2011 In 2004 at the Super Bowl, Janet Jackson had her now-notorious "wardrobe malfunction," in which most of America saw something they had never been exposed to before - a partially bared female breast. People just kind of lost it over that. The FCC received nearly 540,000 complaints - 65,000 of which came from the Parents Television Council (PTC). Fines were handed out and to this day there's been a chilling effect on what can be said or seen on television. But that only applies to what's really dangerous, like female breasts and bad words; especially if they are included with the kind of family time that can only come from watching grown men pummel the crap out of each other for a ball and grotesquely large paychecks. Bloody, gore-filled photos, however, are a different story. There's been an outcry for pictures of Osama Bin Laden's shot-up corpse to be released to the public. Sarah Palin, the preferred candidate for the voter who likes things that are shiny, advocated for the release of the photos on Twitter, saying, "Show photo as warning to others seeking Americas destruction. No pussy-footing around, no politicking, no drama, its part of the mission (sic). The former Miss Wasilla raises an interesting point. Would releasing the photo of a perforated and bloody Osama Bin Laden deter further violence against America? Let's see. Most of them live in a part of the world where the absence of war would be truly unusual, so it's safe to say they've seen a few dead bodies in their time. In fact, some of them volunteer to become dead bodies in order to create more dead bodies. Death is no stranger to them. Nope. Not buying it Sarah. Thanks for playing. Well, what about the public's right to know? That seems legitimate. To that end, the group Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the photos and videos from the raid. If successful, it intends on releasing them. We are prepared to sue if they dont respond as they are supposed to under the law, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Washington D.C. newspaper The Hill. I have not heard anything from the president that would provide a lawful basis for not providing the photos. Not wanting to be seen as spiking the football is not a lawful reason to withhold documents under FOIA. This is arguably the most important military operation in our lifetimes. This is basic information. Basic information is that he's dead, we did it, here's how and we buried him at sea. Photos and videos of Bin Laden getting blown away is rather extraordinary information. Technically, I can file an open records request on any number of things, like autopsy photos, for example. Say a beautiful 18 year-old girl is brutally murdered right here in McPherson. The Kansas Attorney General's office says that autopsy photos are a matter of public record. It's public information. You have

the right to know the circumstances of this poor girl's death. I could do just that, publishing whatever I get. I'd be perfectly within the law. But if I put those photos on the front page would you ever buy a copy of this paper again? So I don't buy the argument that the public has a right to see the photos in order to know. We already know. We know not only because the government confirmed it, but because our enemies confirmed it. Al Qaeda said he's dead too. The SEALs say he's dead. Pakistan says he's dead. He's dead. Case closed. Next, please. The truth is as simple as it is disconcerting. We don't need to see the photos of Bin Laden's corpse. We want to see them. This is the United States of Voyeurism. We like to watch. We'll never admit it, because we cling to our hypocrisies like a debutante clings to one of the Titanic's life preservers, but never forget that this is a nation that slows down to see car accidents. However, if we can give things like this the thinnest, most transparent pseudo-moral cloak, then bring it on. Then the violence, the obscenity and the gore becomes informative and instructive, just like Palin said. We can take a lesson from it. Bin Laden is guilty and we don't need to concern ourselves with the better angels of our nature for him. So, let's see that shot up corpse. Let's comfort ourselves with disclaimers that the photos are for mature audiences. While we're at it, let's lead in to the newscast that shows those photos with a program like Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, where every week we see pedophilia and rape on display. But that's okay, because we get to see the punishment for those crimes with the ensuing closure in the same hour just like in the real world! Is the hypocritical disconnect really that obscured? Is violence, obscenity and gore really okay when we can slap a faux moral label on it? You know whats really obscene? The kind of rationalization that makes a wardrobe malfunction a horrible event and bloody photos of a corpse a lesson in righteous retribution. It's telling kids, albeit indirectly, that photos of a dead body are less harmful than a partially bared breast. Maybe we should release the photos after all. At the very least, it would be an action that reflects the values we actually adhere to instead of the values we claim to profess.