Riding waves of celebration upon the death of former Libyan leader Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi Thursday, many international news outlets violated basic norms of sensibility by prominently posting graphic images of Gaddafi’s final moments and his grotesquely abused corpse.

While the media has a responsibility to inform their audience of these events, publications should exercise restraint when employing explicit content that may be more disturbing than informative.

The powerful events of last Thursday mark the end of an oppressive chapter in the history of Libya. The violent nature of this first step toward building a new regime, however, does not need to be reported in such gory detail.

Unfortunately, many major news outlets — notably BBC International and El Mundo — posted the images of the dead leader on their homepages to capitalize on the images’ shock value and to increase website hits. While these photos were quickly removed and reposted behind warning pages, there is reason for concern about the judgment of these and other news outlets. In light of such distasteful coverage, is there a need to regulate the kind of content respectable news outlets can share with the public? Journalists are responsible for presenting information to their audience, but that should not entail disturbing imagery that will undoubtedly upset members of that audience.

All media organizations must exercise caution in presenting graphic material. The New York Times and other organizations should be applauded for their coverage of Gaddafi’s death. By placing warnings on explicit videos and images, these outlets allowed readers to decide whether they wanted to expose themselves to the goriest aspects of the story.

Ultimately, media outlets must balance their responsibility to fully inform the public with their equally important duty to respect the rights of viewers who wish to avoid mature content.