I was catching up on the testimony in the Sandusky case and I read what the assistant said. This is the guy who said that he saw something happening in the showers and then reported it to Paterno. As I was reading something hit me rather hard and I found it disturbing, which in turn led to my question, the title of this post.
In all the articles covering the testimony, the journalist who wrote it said what this man saw. What I mean is specifics. enough specifics that an image can form in your head of what he saw.
That bothered me a lot and I realized that this is not the first time I’ve read a news article describing details of sexual abuse. These victims were, and some still are, kids. What value is there in writing out the details so people can imagine it? I’m seriously asking.
Part of me could only think about the other predators out there reading these articles and getting off on it. How is that helpful? And are the details added to make the articles more titillating? That’s disturbing too. It feels wrong to know that thousands of people are reading this and then having the image form in their head. Children were hurt and it feels like the details are being put out there, not to make people support the victims or to expose the horrific nature of the crime, but to excite and make people gasp. Is it entertainment now? Or am I just taking this badly?