Pictures of mourners at funerals

Murt10

Registered User
Messages
637
Is it just me, or does anyone else find the 1/2 front page picture of Marian Finucane at the funeral of her friend Nuala O'Faolain totally objectionable?

Normally, I have no time for these media personalities, but I feel that this picture and pictures like it, showing people, media personalities and private individuals alike, grieving at the news of the death or funeral of a loved one or friend, is a total invasion of that persons genuine grief and privacy. All this is done purely in the interest of selling more newspapers.

As I said I have no affection for media personalities, and I absolutely loved all the coverage that Pat Kenny got for trying to take his neighbours and former friends land by stealth, but this is something completely different, and is a low point for so called journalism.


Murt
 
I agree. I've often thought that a media presence at funerals is an unnecessary and inapprpriate intrusion. People should be allowed grieve with some degree of privacy. I don't know how photos, such as today's one, necessarily serve the public interest.
 
The public have an insatiable greed for bad news stories. The papers know that this sells.

Agreed. Besides, media personalities / famous people get paid loads of money / make money out of their profile. They cannot have it both ways.
 
Normally, I have no time for these media personalities

...

I absolutely loved all the coverage that Pat Kenny got for trying to take his neighbours and former friends land by stealth
Bit of a contradiction there, eh? :confused:
 
Agreed. Besides, media personalities / famous people get paid loads of money / make money out of their profile. They cannot have it both ways.

Not a very understanding attitude for someone so concerned for his postie?
 
Agreed. Besides, media personalities / famous people get paid loads of money / make money out of their profile. They cannot have it both ways.

The Flood family in Clonroche were not celebrities and made no money from their profile. Yet their funeral was invaded by a phalanx of paparazzi who went to elaborate lengths to photograph the bereaved despite a concerted effort to keep them at bay and repeated appeals for privacy.
 
Yet their funeral was invaded by a phalanx of paparazzi who went to elaborate lengths to photograph the bereaved despite a concerted effort to keep them at bay and repeated appeals for privacy.
Paparazzi wouldn't exist if there wasn't such a huge market for it. Keep an eye on how many people you know buy Now/Hello/The Sun/etc... Sad but true.
 
I totally agree with the OP , even a media woman like Marian deserves to have her privacy respected . The private bits, that she shares with the public , are hers to share or not to share as she chooses. This morning the Indo stole some of her privacy and dignity?
pjq
 
I have to agree with the Op. When I saw the photo my first reaction was that it was a shocking invasion of privacy
 
I'd say the family allowed it as the camera was in the church.

There was a big interest in the story (I wasn't interested in it myself) as they had received a lot of messages. The cameras didn't go the graveyard which makes me think that the family said okay to everything up to that.

I do agree that what the media thinks the public is interested in greatly differs to what I'm interested in. That said they have to sell papers and when a certain story is put on the front page its sells and sells. I don't buy it but obviously other people do.
 
The Indo strikes again today, with pictures of Packie Bonner and another ex-Celtic player in tears at the funeral of a colleague. The only solution is to boycott the Indo. I haven't bought a paper since they gave front page coverage to the involvement of a Garda in the Abbeylara shooting (years after every possible enquiry into Abbeylara had completed) on the day the same Garda was burying his wife and infant child.
 
Back
Top