Internet-provided videos run the gamut of emotions and incentives. Whether simply meant to entertain, such as that of a cat endlessly playing a piano, or to inform, such as that of an MIT class on thermodynamics, the Web world is a Google searcher’s oyster.

Yet while one can find — or shoot and post — almost anything one’s heart desires, only the most entertaining, dramatic or awe-inspiring videos rise to the top of the ever-so-democratic “most viewed” list that viewers’ millions of clicks, or essentially votes, create.

For better or worse — I’d argue for worse — a large chunk of these videos are violent.

A recent heavily viewed video, for example, is that of the death of Georgian luge athlete Nodar Kumaritashvili, killed Friday at the Vancouver Olympics after crashing into a steel girder at 90 mph.

Despite NBC’s and the International Olympic Committee’s attempts to censor the free release of the video, which they jointly own, the graphic footage already has millions of views on the Web.

The question is why.

While many on the internet have apparently taken the move by NBC and the IOC as straightforward, undemocratic censorship — and the World Wide Web’s best quality is indeed its function as a free marketplace of ideas — there is simply no reason for it to be made available to the public.

Though the public’s “right to know” is inarguably one of the most fundamental features — perhaps the most fundamental feature — of democratic society, this does not fit the mold. It offers the general public nothing that they have a right to, but simply the gratification through graphic violence that is now expected when watching everything from fictional horror movies to the 10 p.m. local news.

Of course that’s not to say none have a right to view the video. For starters, professional luge athletes should have access to the video because they need to recognize how violent their sport is.

While it’s likely they already know this, the video is a stark reminder, and it might very well cause some to reassess their participation in the sport.

The IOC, and specifically its course designers, undoubtedly have a right and need to view the video as well so they can figure out what went wrong and can be done to prevent any future deaths from this sport. Of note, they’ve already taken the seemingly obvious action of padding the steel girders that surround the course and are considering repositioning the posts farther away from the track in the future. If such outcomes are proven unavoidable, the IOC might even consider dropping the sport — who knows.

Lastly and most obviously, Kumaritashvili’s friends and family have a right to view the video so that they can see how he died and hopefully gain a sense of closure.

But that’s it, because unlike videos of violence in Iraq and Afghanistan or photos of dead civilians and American soldiers killed there — which I fully support being shown unedited and often in the United States — this video has nothing to do with us.

Yes, we have a right to know what is being done in our country’s name with our tax dollars, how our soldiers are both killing and dying and, in the most basic sense, what war really looks like.

If we are to form opinions about the wars we are waging, we need to see those videos and images.

But we do not need to see the video of Kumaritashvili’s crash and death. The media that show or make it available do nothing but prove their own lack of respect and economic interest by pandering to the morbidly curious.

Because so many media are making it available, it’s valuable to conclude by reminding that those who make the choice to watch it prove the same about themselves.

Steve Adams is a graduate student in journalism and mass communication from Annapolis, Md.