I would not expect any major news outlet to broadcast the beheading of an American, regardless of political motives. It's part of a self-imposed decency we have in our midst, and it's okay.
The internet provides ample opportunity to observe just about anything for those who are interested, but the digital age also bit us big time insofar as major media can now broadcast, with political motives, those things that once upon a time were part of censorable litigation - better kept out of view for the general welfare.
We have a seemingly big problem when it comes to "the right to know," on the one hand, and the "need to shut up" on the other hand. We need to ask whether it is always beneficial to know everything about everything. Egads. I work with people who think they have a God-given need to know everyone elses' business, and they talk as if they know it all, all puffed up with their assumed knowledge and indignation when they don't even know Jack Schitt as a friend, let alone a relative.
Sometimes it's better just to shut up, bear down, read, evaluate, learn, and do something productive.
"Self-imposed decency"? Perhaps one could call that pleasant blue background that the CBS videographer used as a backdrop to superimpose hundreds of Abu Ghraib pictures (leashing, beatings, naked pyramids, you name it) to be repeated through a dozen news cycles "self-imposed decency"...
"We need to ask whether it is always beneficial to know everything about everything. Egads. I work with people who think they have a God-given need to know everyone elses' business, and they talk as if they know it all, all puffed up with their assumed knowledge and indignation when they don't even know Jack Schitt as a friend, let alone a relative."
Jack Schitt = strawman. Thanks for playing.