There was no doubt what would be the headline of today's newspapers. "Saddam Executed" was certain to be echoed across the entire national press.

But the pictures that accompanied most of them were sickening. Pictures of Saddam either with the noose around his neck with his masked executioners looking on, or soon after being cut down.

These pictures should not have been out on the front page. Although their is justification in claiming that there was no way not to print the pictures after they had been released, the sensationalisation of them was the work of the media themselves. I think it was entirely unnecessary for them to be printed in such an full front-page unmissable manner.

The camera-phone video of Saddam's execution is a different issue. Although it is sickening in itself, it is entirely the choice of the individual whether or not to view it. Even though I have watched it, I had no desire to see the execution until I knew that there was a video, and that it was easily accessible. Also, it was my choice to view it. The could have resisted the temptation, but chose not to.

What sickens me most is that disregard for personal choice over whether or not to view either the pictures or the video. Had the images been printed in a small size inside the paper, the reader would have had discretion over whether or not to look at them. We didn't get that choice.

I am not posting the pictures or video or any links to them for a reason: it would be hypocritical of me to do so. They are all easily findable elsewhere, so whether or not you view them is up to you.

Other good posts on the issue: Iain Dale, Dizzy Thinks, Martine Martin