Behind the Scenes: Journalists’ Ethics When Reporting Live Exorcisms

Introduction: Why exorcisms demand a higher ethical bar

Live or near-live coverage of exorcisms and deliverance rites draws intense public interest but also creates unique responsibilities for journalists. These events often involve vulnerable people (including minors), religious rites, potential medical or psychiatric emergencies, and environments where consent and privacy can be compromised. Reporters and producers must balance the public’s right to know with minimizing harm, preserving dignity, and complying with legal and platform constraints. Journalistic codes of ethics—like the Society of Professional Journalists’ guidance emphasizing “minimizing harm”—provide a foundational framework for these decisions.

Contemporary context: Documentaries, dramatizations and the spotlight

High‑profile dramatizations and documentary films in recent years have renewed mainstream attention on alleged possession cases and on-the-ground deliverances. Films and series that claim to be “inspired by” real incidents can blur lines between factual reporting and dramatization; producers and journalists should clearly label reenactment or fiction elements and take extra care when a story involves identifiable real people who remain at risk of stigma or legal exposure.

Recent mainstream releases that revisit alleged possession cases have sparked renewed debate about accuracy, consent and the responsibilities of storytellers toward survivors and witnesses. Reporters should treat dramatized retellings and promotional materials as separate from verified documentary evidence when informing audiences.

Practical ethical checklist for live reporting on exorcisms

Before cameras roll or a live stream goes public, follow a documented checklist and make decisions in consultation with legal counsel, ethics editors, medical advisers and, where appropriate, clergy representatives:

• Get informed, written consent: Secure consent from all adult participants and legal guardians of minors. Explain how footage will be used, archived and distributed; offer the right to withdraw consent before publication when possible.
• Prioritize safety and urgent care: If a subject shows signs of medical or psychiatric crisis, pause coverage and summon medical professionals—never prioritize footage over immediate care.
• Minimize harm and avoid sensationalism: Use restraint in editing and headlines. Avoid graphic close-ups or sound mixes designed to shock.
• Protect minors and vulnerable adults: Apply heightened protections: blurred faces, withheld audio, anonymization and restricted distribution if requested.
• Document chain of custody: Record who arranged the event, who authorized filming, and any payments or incentives provided to participants.
• Consult clinicians and cultural experts: Include mental‑health professionals, neurologists (for sleep‑paralysis or seizure risks) and religious scholars to contextualize behavior and ritual.
• Assess public interest vs. privacy: Legal access doesn't automatically justify broadcast; weigh societal value of the report against foreseeable harm to individuals and families.

These practical steps help teams meet both ethical and editorial standards—and reduce legal and reputational risk.

Platforms, legality and organizational safeguards

Live streaming introduces additional platform and legal considerations: content platforms maintain community standards for live video and can interrupt or remove streams that violate terms (for example, relating to violent or deceptive practices). Journalists must know host platform rules and the platform’s process for takedown or intervention.

Historically, proposals to broadcast live exorcisms have generated institutional pushback and public controversy—an important reminder that even lawful broadcasts can be ethically fraught and may trigger community or clerical condemnation. Newsrooms should have clear escalation procedures, pre-approved legal checklists, and rapid‑response plans should a live event require emergency intervention or platform removal.

Conclusions and recommended newsroom policies

Covering exorcisms responsibly means combining rigorous verification with a harm‑minimization ethic. Newsrooms should adopt formal policies that require:

1. Pre‑approval from an ethics editor and legal counsel before any live coverage;
2. Mandatory safety and medical protocols on site;
3. Signed informed consent for publication and a transparent statement about reenactment or dramatization; and
4. Post‑publication care: outreach to subjects, corrections procedures, and embargoed review of sensitive segments where appropriate.

When in doubt, err on the side of privacy and safety. Coverage that respects human dignity, clarifies context, and consults relevant experts will inform audiences without exploiting suffering for spectacle.