The Citizen’s article “World Cup blasts: toll tops 74” (The Citizen, 13/07/2010, p. 10) has given Media Monitoring Africa (MMA) many reasons to be mad. In its coverage of the Uganda bombings, which killed 74 people who were watching the World Cup final, the report identified a child. It also used an extremely graphic photo depicting dead victims, relied on sensationalist language to describe the events, and used racial stereotypes.

This article identified a 16 year old girl as one of the victims wounded by the explosion Under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Art 3(1): In all actions concerning children…the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. It is hard to imagine any circumstances in which identifying a 16 year old, who has just been through a traumatic ordeal, would be in her best interests.

The article uses unnecessarily gratuitous and sensationalist language. For example it included a quote describing the 16 year old girl as “rolling around in a pool of blood, screaming.” While The Citizen may argue that this quote came from the victim’s friend, newspapers must take responsibility for their content and The Citizen should have chosen not to publish this quote as it is potentially harmful and disrespectful to the child victim.

Rather than hunt for sensationalist and catchy quotes journalists should always consider the circumstances of those they are interviewing and how traumatized and confused they may be following an event such as the bombing. This will impact on the victims’ ability to think and speak clearly and sensibly. Again this speaks to the ethical principle of minimizing harm, which The Citizenhas violated in this article.

A further concern is over the newspaper’s use of a highly graphic photograph showing the dead bodies following the bomb blast. MMA believes that the publication of such a graphic photo was unnecessary and unethical, and has violated the dignity of the victims depicted in the image, and of their families. Graphic and gruesome images have been used effectively by the media to raise awareness, stimulate debate and convey the extremity of the situation depicted. However, in this case the image was not contextualized, nor was there any justification given as to why it was published. If a newspaper is to publish a violent and disturbing image, it must at the very least explain to its readers why it has chosen to do so. Otherwise it is merely a gratuitous photograph that may in fact contribute to normalising violent images.

It is also worth noting that media research has shown that images such as this one, which depict exclusively black victims, reinforce racial stereotypes and can lead to the victimization of black Africans. We rarely see these images if victims are from developed nations.  It is the media’s responsibility to be aware of deeply rooted social patterns and the negative impact they can have, and to try and break them by changing their approach to covering such issues and suggesting alternative ways of interpreting news. In this case The Citizen should have avoided publishing a gruesome photograph that only shows the dead bodies of black Africans.

The article further contributed to racial stereotyping by only providing details of white victims. The article mentions that workers from a California-based aid group and US church group were among those injured including the 16 year old girl who was identified. The article does not include any reference to the conditions experienced or injuries sustained by Africans as a result of the bombing, except to say they were among a total of 74 people killed by the blast.

Again, to break such racial stereotypes, and to challenge the notion that white victims warrant greater attention than African victims, the media needs to counter it through the information and imagery they choose to publish as well the language they employ.