Subject: Broadcasting Executions
 

Sorry to bug you again with another of my pontificating letters, but this issue isn't getting enough
notice.  Recently a program called On The Media at WNYC (public radio) in New York actually
broadcast the tape of the execution of a Georgia man in 1984, and the program invited
comment.  Of course I had to fire off one of my diatribes.  Now I sure don't expect you to publish
this, but I'm hoping you'll raise the issue on your website, especially since you're in Oklahoma.
I know McVeigh is getting what he deserves, and I'm not arguing against capital punishment.
But only fascistic regimes employ the terror of public executions against their populace, not
democracies.  And of course we're not living in a democracy anymore.
 

The address to the program is www.wnyc.org/new/talk/onthemedia/otmindex.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Only the most barbaric and totalitarian nations in the world continue to stage public executions.
Absolutely nothing is gained by it, except to communicate the state's own disregard for the
value of human life, any human life, and perhaps fill the population with fear of it's own police
and government.  This practice cannot be allowed to start again, it accomplishes nothing
except satisfy the bloodlust of the most reactionary elements in the political spectrum.

Was it right for WNYC to broadcast the audio version of this execution?  Not particularily, but the
harm which such a broadcast could engender (primarily by destabilizing an already unstable
minority in the population, and providing fuel for those who seek such broadcasts) is muted by
several factors: it is a 'sanitized' version of the process, it is not a video presentation, it will not
receive very wide distribution (in spite of the NPR network scope), it occurred very remotely in
time to a virtually unknown person.  Under these conditions the broadcast is unlikely to even be
noticed by any sizeable portion of the population, let alone affect it in any way.

Now change those circumstances: a live broadcast over television of a notorious killer in
prime-time by one or two or three major networks with much advance publicity and coverage in
the media.  Then you will see the population take notice, and clamor about it for weeks before,
and perhaps even after the event.  Will airtime be sold to major advertisers?  Will the networks
plug the event on it's highest rated shows?  Will there be a "pre-game" show and "post-game"
analysis?  Can you guess the cheapening effect such hype has on human life?  Would most
Americans see it for what it is, a sensational grab for ratings at the expense of decency?

Would most Americans watch?  Probably, but what does that have to do with it?  If the media
makes the most sensational human event available it only proves the voyeuristic nature of
people in general, not overwheming approval for such broadcasts.  People slow down on
freeways everyday to view accidents, does that mean they want to see more of them?  It's only
natural curiosity, not bloodthirsty approval or macabre fascination.  Yes there are those who will
stop and stare long after the last broken glass has been swept away.  Our media and our
justice system does not, and should not exist to cater to them.

Unfortunately the political and media culture today seeks to gain every vote and earn every
buck it can.  And if that means exciting the most maniacal fringe elements in society then the
attitude appears to be to hell with the rest of us.  The cost of such "excitement" is not really
bourne by the media or the government, but by society at large having to endure god-knows
how many more insults to our intelligence, assaults on our dignity and deviant behaviors to our
persons (not to mention more "aggressive" policing in our communities).  John Ashcroft has
done the American people a great disservice and opened a door not knowing or caring what
lies behind it, no matter how much he feels the "victim's pain".  He won't have to face the
consequences of his actions, we will.