Headlines erupted with news of the terrorist group, Islamic State (IS), earlier this month after American journalist James Foley was executed by apparent members of the group. A video of the execution was then posted on YouTube and disseminated thoroughly on the Internet.

Social media played a role in the dissemination with many Twitter users posting images from the video on their accounts.

Almost immediately, Twitter CEO Dick Costolo tweeted that his company has been and would continue to suspend accounts related to “this graphic imagery.” It was a move celebrated by some and criticized by others.

As journalism begins using social media more to get information to the masses, the role of social media as a content manager needs to be more thoroughly discussed.

Take for example a traditional newspaper. The paper has its reporters, photographers and columnists who produce content that will later be evaluated and possibly published.

The people who decide on the actual publishing are editors. These are people who sometimes have to make tough calls on what to share with their viewers or readers.

After the bombing incident at the Boston Marathon in 2013, the New York Times chose a rather graphic image for their front page. Other newspapers opted for less graphic images.

This choice was likely not automatic and was weighed by the multiple editors. It was also met with criticism and commendation alike.

Finally, you have the printers. These are people who print literally whatever the editor puts in the paper.

They are simply the medium used to disseminate the ideas, facts and images created and decided upon by the newspaper staff.

Twitter should not act as an editor. It should act as a printer as they are simply the medium used to share ideas or, in this case, images.

Sometimes these ideas and images will be unpopular, distasteful or even illegal — spreading obscenity, threats or defaming information. But these same ideas can be found in any other medium.

The New York Post’s front page showed a disturbing image from the video just moments before Foley was killed. While this is certainly distasteful and disturbing, it was a conscious decision made by editors whose job it is to make those decisions.

When the New York Post tweeted the cover from their account, they were not suspended. This reflects a possible double standard of Twitter that should also be addressed.

Images in the face of death are extremely powerful — gut wrenching and emotional at times. They can change the face of a war much more quickly than facts and figures of casualties.

In the Vietnam War, many controversial images were widely seen. A video of a Vietcong soldier being summarily executed with no warning can still be found quite easily on YouTube.

While these images are not easy to look at and should not be taken lightly or shown in every medium, the American people should have the freedom to view these images and decide for themselves what they mean.

Twitter and other social media should not put themselves in a position to make that decision.

—For the editorial board, Jake Trease