Execution Video Controversy

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/us/24video.html?pagewanted=2&ref=us

In light of a slightly gone-awry execution this past June, activists pushed for a recording to be made of the lethal-injection process of Andrew DeYoung. The footage is reportedly for observational purposes only, but has nonetheless opened up questions of public distribution.
The idea of capital punishment makes me ill, so the idea of watching footage of one is unappealing beyond words. However, the death penalty is legal in more than half of the states and, if it's going to happen, I think it's the responsibility of the government to ensure the execution is the most humane, and painless as possible. If that means a video tape is necessary, I think that's an acceptable sacrifice to make. Perhaps the best way to go about that so as to not offend or abuse the memory of the convict, would be to get them to give permission for the recording.
Many of the people mentioned in the article indicated that the public release of such a video would make them uncomfortable, and I have to say my sentiments are in the same vein. While one man pointed out that foreign executions can be found easily on Youtube, authur Erica Goode related the release of an execution video to the last public hanging in 1936. I'm not sure how far that Youtube argument really carries. It has the familiar ring of the "but all the other kids are going" argument you throw at your parents when you want them to extend your curfew. There are a lot of things that happen in other countries, that doesn't mean they're acceptable here. But the idea of watching a recording of an execution does have a distinctly 19th century taint to it that repulses me.
What I guess it boils down to is the question of whether one would rather be able to verify the humanity of the capital punishment system, or risk having content that could potentially breach the privacy of citizens/the morality of Youtube frequenters.