Analysis Of Executions Should Be Televised

“Executions Should Be Televised,” is an essay that was written by Zachary Shemtob and David Lat. Shemtob and Lat makes an argument on whether or not executions should be televised. Although others argue against it being televised, the two writers do explain why it should be in their opinion. The reasons why it should televised is for those that are concern to witness whether or not lethal injection causes any painful sufferings and also the people should have the rights to see what is being done in their name and tax dollars with their own eyes rather than having to read about what journalists think or vaguely describe using the morning paper. This is a brief summary of the essay; Shemtob and Lat start off by talking Georgia’s third execution that would have passed unnoticed. A lawyer tried to persuade a judge to allow the recording of Andrew Grant DeYoung’s execution so see whether or not it causes any excruciating pain. A defense lawyer argued against this stating that no one wants to see anyone go through this kind of torture, Shemtob and Lat disagreed and stated on page fifty three, “executions in the United States ought to be made public.” They go on to point out that a functioning democracy demands maximum accountability and transparency; meaning as long as executions happen behind closed doors we, …show more content…
This essay should leave others thinking about what is being hidden and how difficult it is to read what social media wants them to believe. Overall Shemtob and Lat did a great job in supplying the readers some details involving past executions for them to see that there are two sides of a story. By them doing this it leaves the readers questioning how much the government is willing to reveal to their people about their