| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
FEMA blocks photos of NOLA dead
Scott Bort, Student/Intern, Photographer
 |
Chicago | Il | USA | Posted: 4:27 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> From the same goverment that didn't bring you photos of coffins of servicemen and women killed in action...
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001...
"We have requested that no photographs of the deceased be made by the media," the spokeswoman told Reuters via e-mail."
They are in fact asking that the historical record does not show the amounts of dead that occured from the govermental breakdown after Hurricane Katrina. As a historian, this is bothersome. As a photojournalist, this just seems wrong. |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
 |
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 4:31 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Put the politics aside for a second, Scott. From an Emergency Management point of view, we didn't want those photos published until the bodies were identified and family notified.
Would you want to be a person who wondered where their loved ones were then get the answer from seeing a dead face on the front page? |
|
Mark Smith, Photographer
 |
Elk City | OK | USA | Posted: 4:37 PM on 09.07.05 |
| ->> Don't be logical Jason, it's obviously a cover-up. |
|
Devin Bruce, Photographer
|
Sacramento | CA | USA | Posted: 4:42 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Jason,
With all due respect, do we worry about showing the dead (Iraqis) in Iraq? What about the bombings in London? Or the Tsunami victims? The question of weither they should or shouldn't run images should be pondered by individual publications and their editors/management. It shouldn't be dictated by FEMA - especially since part of the blame for the amount of death in LA sits directly on their sholders.
I just found out last night that my neighbor was in New Orleans for this whole mess - she was one of the tourists stranded in the hotels there and just got back to Sacramento yesterday. She's saw some horrible stuff and it's important that people see what has happened - dead bodies and all. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
 |
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 4:51 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> It's not a conspiracy - it's a blatant attempt at information control. Some of the most powerful images to come out of the Vietnam War would never exist if current policies were in force at the time.
Documenting the dead is a part of covering the event. As with everything, there are ways to do it without being tacky or insensitive. |
|
David Lucas, Photographer
|
Toronto | On | Canada | Posted: 5:02 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> "What dead...i did't see any dead...just a little water....i don't know what everyone was making a big deal about."
That's what they are hoping to hear in a few weeks-months....
The United States Government dropped the ball on this one. They were faster to repond to the tsunami and they don't want anyone to see dead bodies in thier own backyard. Dead bodies that i think didn't have to happen This is something people need to see. They need to be upset over this. I think about it this way...if you don't see what happened down there these people all died for nothing...it's when you start to see the huge toll in human life that things change...Government policy changes...more money comes in to help the affected area...lets hope that by showing what DID happen and the people who lost their lives that this might never happen again.
Cheers
David Lucas
Staff Photographer
Toronto Sun
http://www.torontosun.com
http://www.davidlucasphotography.com |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 5:03 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Devin,
With a return in respect, your knowledge of the Federal system and emergency management protocol is lacking. FEMA is not a first responder organization and never has been. It's a local>state>federal system, the same as it was in NYC on 9/11, Hurricane Andrew, etc. Again, that's how our federal system works.
Is FEMA free of blame? No, but it's not "directly on their shoulders."
That aside, My response to Scott was why as Emer. Mgt we didn't want photos printed. That's all - that was our official position. |
|
Chris Stanfield, Photo Editor
|
Saint Paul | MN | USA | Posted: 5:15 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> After doing some research, I wanted to share with you what I found out. I spoke with Debbie Charles at Reuters who collected the information (the email response) from FEMA after making a request to have a photographer and reporter to accompany the rescue boats.
To her surprise, the information and conversations she had regarding the event were then taken by another person and made into a news story. After reading her the lead of the Reuters story over the phone, she agreed that the first paragraph was inaccurate:
ORLEANS (Reuters) - The U.S. government agency leading the rescue efforts after Hurricane Katrina said Tuesday it does not want the news media to take photographs of the dead as they are recovered from the flooded New Orleans
area.
The second paragraph of the story IS accurate:
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, heavily criticized
for its slow response to the devastation caused by the hurricane, rejected requests from journalists to accompany rescue boats as they went out to search for storm victims.
Debbie said that her request to get on the boats was denied more due to a policy stemming from FEMA concerning space in the boat should they come across bodies or folks stranded - that they'd need the space in the boat to get them out of the area.
Regarding the photographing of the deceased... Debbie said that FEMA was more concerned with photographing bodies that hadn't had a chance to be identified or that FEMA hadn't had a chance to inform families about. She went on to say that her impression of the request wasn't that FEMA was trying to restrict photos of bodies being made altogether.
If you look at the wires, there are plenty photos of the deceased coming across. I have no doubt that FEMA is restricting access to other operations across the country, but after talking with folks in New Orleans, Baton Rouge and Mississippi, the restrictions seemed to be stemming more out of a concern for HIPPA and privacy. Although slow and limited, some news operations are getting access in places like the Houston Astrodome and other shelters across the country.
Throughout our nation’s history, the ability of a free press to report and document our nation’s tragedies is crucial to having an informed public who will inevitably begin to search for answers and seek solutions in the weeks and months to come. Without the photographs and news stories that bring clarity and scope to such a tragedy, the American public is denied the right to draw informed and intelligent conclusions and then learn from them.
We should urge all government agencies involved with assisting citizens affected by Hurricane Katrina to work with news organizations in the same fashion. A great deal of the healing process for so many people involves their ability to tell their stories so that others may cope, understand and heal alongside them.
With regards,
Chris Stanfield
Director of Photography
Pioneer Press
St. Paul, MN
President
Associated Press Photo Managers |
|
Devin Bruce, Photographer
|
Sacramento | CA | USA | Posted: 5:16 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Jus to clarify, I didn't say that they FEMA were first responders.
All I commented on was the fact that in the last few years there have been many bad things that have happened and that it is important to document those events - ALL of those events. Having an agency that is under scrutiny for people dying because of things they may (or may not) have done come out and say, "Don't take pictures of the the dead people out of respect for the dead" really angers me. How dare they?
Second, I stated the "PART of the blame lies directly on their sholders." I'm not saying that this whole mess is their fault. What I am saying is that there is going to be plenty of blame to go around in the next few months. |
|
Devin Bruce, Photographer
|
Sacramento | CA | USA | Posted: 5:19 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Chris,
Just saw your post. I agree with everyting you said and after reading "from the horse's mout", I feel a lot better about FEMA and their policies concerning what is happening. It makes sense.
- D |
|
David Lucas, Photographer
|
Toronto | On | Canada | Posted: 5:25 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> I would also like to say that after reading Chris' post i feel much better about the situation..they are difficult to look at but i think everyone needs to look.
Cheers
David Lucas
Staff Photographer
Toronto Sun
http://www.torontosun.com
http://www.davidlucasphotography.com |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 5:29 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Devin, my apologies for misreading your post.
However, I still feel the same way and I would hope you could answer with all honesty if you would feel the same as you do now if the camera was pointed at you.
I can't do it. But I've seen death, I've seen destruction.
I haven't seen a dead person yet on TV (not that they aren't shown, I just haven't seen them) and I know the kind of destruction and devastation that took place. But how many pictures of dead bodies does it take to prove a point?
Maybe it's just me, but pictures from the Holocaust that disturb me more are not the pictures of dead bodies piled up, but the pictures of the LIVE ones dying. |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 5:32 PM on 09.07.05 |
| ->> OK, I'll take a deep breath and relax now. |
|
Daniel Tunstall, Photographer
 |
Pearland (Houston) | TX | USA | Posted: 5:35 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> This is my opinion, as I was an EMT for 8 years before getting into stringing for a weekly. Photojournalist, either TV or Still, DO NOT belong on rescue boats during active search and rescue missions. Period. Every spot on those small boats needs to be used to the maximum capacity for the mission.
Until the water is drained, every boat out there could be a rescue boat, even if it is assigned to picking up the deceased.
If XYZ news wants to cover it, they should be allowed access, but no rescue resources should be spared for the media. Access to the area via their own resources should be allowed and at their own risk. |
|
Dave Amorde, Photographer
 |
Lake Forest | CA | USA | Posted: 5:48 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> I'm curious. The Reuters quote above uses the phrase "as they are recovered" in reference to the photography restriction. Is that language official in any way? I've seen plenty of images of dead bodies in-sitiu over the past week. On the other hand, I have never seen any media form of actual bodies being recovered. That process has always been, and always should be, something that is treated with the utmost respect.
Along the same lines as the FEMA concerns seem to suggest, I'll also note that I cannot remember seeing a current news story that contained images of the dead where their faces were visible and recognizable. If that happens to be out of concern for immediate survivors, that's fine by me. |
|
John Riddell, Photographer
 |
Toronto | ON | Canada | Posted: 6:40 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> So who are allowing the media on boats to obtain the images we're seeing in the newspapers and on the six o'clock news every night?
Certainly they're taking up space for survivors should they come across any. |
|
Richard Johnson, Photographer, Assistant
|
Tampa | FL | USA | Posted: 7:23 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Why does this have to be political? There's no conspiracy--just a request for common decency! Why does anyone feel they have to publish photos of the dead?
What ever happened to common decency? Everyone knows THOUSANDS have probably died in this disaster. Why does anyone feel they have to show the deceased?
I've seen, up close and personal, more than my fair share of people who have died in horrific manners. The evening news and daily paper have displayed more and more graphic images over the years and people hae become desensitized to the horror of it all.
What ever happened to common decency? |
|
Scott Varley, Photographer
 |
Torrance | CA | USA | Posted: 7:58 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Richard,
Common decency has nothing to do with this. We live in a free society with a free press. When the government tries to tell us what we can or cannot report on, then something is seriously wrong. Leave the decisions to publish or televise these images up to the editors and producers - not the government. We need to have the options available to show these pictures if we think it will serve our readers better with a more complete story of what is really going on. Obviously, it is always a tough decision for editors any time a dead body is published and it is taken very seriously. People in FEMA and other agencies are trying to do damage control with the theory "If you can't see it, it didn't happen". |
|
Michael R. Sisak, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Commack | NY | USA | Posted: 8:11 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Seems more like a logical reason (no space on the boats) is being used as a convenient excuse not to allow photos of the dead. However, does that really restrict the taking and publishing of those photos? No. It just makes access much harder. There have been photos and video of the dead (today's Oprah show, with Anderson Cooper reporting) includes such images. However, the bodies they showed were found in Mississippi without FEMA assistance. Oprah/Cooper decided not to show any of the gruesomeness of the bodies, just feet or hands. The impact was there though, as was the impact of the photo several days ago on the front page of The New York Times, in which a woman and a dog stood on a bridge as a body floated in the water below. And, is a "request" from FEMA a wholesale ban, a blanket disregard for the constitution, or is it the kind of unenforceable "courtesy" lots of people in private enterprise request? Just some thoughts that came to mind.
Sincerely,
Mike Sisak |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 8:19 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Richard,
I'm looking at a copy of Life Magazine's excellent book, "100 Photographs that Changed the World". Photos of dead or near dead include:
P. 48 - Triangle Shirtwaist Company Fire, 1911 (sweatshops)
P. 51 - Suicide of Emily Davison, 1913 (woman suffrage)
P. 53 - Lynchings of African Americans in Marion, IN., 1930 (racism)
P. 61 - Massacre at Sharpeville, 1960 (South Africa racism)
P. 87 - Oklahoma City Firefighter with dead child, 1995 (domestic terrorism)
P. 89 - David Kirby deathbed, 1990 (AIDS)
P. 112 - Dead soldiers on a beach, 1943 (WWII)
P. 116 - Mussolini & others shot and hanging, 1945 (WWII)
P. 118 - Pile of deceased jews at Buchenwald concentration camp, 1945 (WWII)
P. 133 - Kent State, 1970 (Vietnam)
...and on and on and on.
This is why you take the photos. It's not about gore. It's not about glorifying bloodshed. It's to tell the story. |
|
Michael R. Sisak, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Commack | NY | USA | Posted: 8:20 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> One quick note, in reference to Jason's clarification on the role of FEMA...
Isn't it the only federal agency allowed to suspend all constitutional rights and take over just about everything in American life?
Maybe this is the first step. |
|
Richard Johnson, Photographer, Assistant
|
Tampa | FL | USA | Posted: 8:20 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Scott,
I am the last person you need to try and preach freedom of the press to.
If you don't think common decency has anything to do with the publication of the dead victims in this disaster, then I am very sorry for you.
Freedom carries heavy responsibilities. One of those is plain, old decency. |
|
Sean Stevens, Photographer
|
Marble Falls | TX | | Posted: 8:41 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> I forget where I got this quote...maybe it was from a member here.
"Photojournalists are part of the team of first responders whenever a tragedy occurs. They are there to document the news event in pictures and their work can have a strong and lasting impact on the public consciousness and themselves."
Take it for what it's worth. |
|
Geoff Miller, Photographer
 |
Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 9:57 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Let's look at this story a little more closely, for everyone getting up on their 1st Amendment soapboxes.
"Journalist Groups Protest FEMA Ban on Photos of Dead"
First off... there's NOTHING in the body of the story to support that statement. "Requesting" isn't the same thing as "Banning". No one's said to be threatened with ejection or arrest, and no CF cards have been yanked.
"NEW YORK Forced to defend what some critics consider its slow response to the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency said on Tuesday it does not want the news media to take photographs of the dead as they are recovered from New Orleans."
Wow... It would have been nice if the author had stated some evidence for the idea presented that the reason for the request lay in the criticism of the agency. Speculation presented as fact ain't journalism in my book... but maybe that what they teach in J-school.
"FEMA, which is leading the rescue efforts, rejected requests from journalists to accompany rescue boats as they went out to search for storm victims, Reuters reported."
Here's the "meat" of the issue. In fact, the only thing being "banned" is shooters in FEMA boats. As worst, FEMA can be accused of not wanting to facilitate the taking of body recovery photos. Translated, FEMA said "If you want to take close up photos of dead bodies... get your own boat." |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 10:27 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Michael,
FEMA does not have the right to suspend constitutional rights. One origin of this theory comes from right-wing groups is that when Clinton signed an executive order in 1994 declaring a national emergency because of the prevalence of WMDs, this gave him the right to take over the country under the auspices of FEMA.
The Posse Comitatus act (among others) forbids the president from using military troops to enforce civilian law except when granted by congress or the constitution. Thus, since FEMA is part of the executive branch - they can't be used.
There are other reasons, mainly Article 4, section 4.
FEMA's sole role is the coordination of relief assistance between federal state and local agencies, management of funds and provide training.
However, state and local authorities are not nearly as restricted and can declare states of emergency and it is common on the local and state levels. |
|
Mike Ullery, Photographer
 |
Troy | OH | USA | Posted: 10:39 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Just for the record folks:
While I'm sure that many things could have been handled better by the government during and immediately following the hurricane, there are way too many people who are acting as if the government of the United States is responsible for the hurricane and therefore all of the deaths that resulted.
This was a major hurricane...a natural disaster...an act of God. Sure, some lives could have been saved if...if...if.
While I don't claim to be an expert, does anyone know the logistics involved with getting the massive rescue effort mobilized that was/is necessary to deal with this situation? And what about the fact that they need to get that large of a force into an area that was all but inaccessable? This did not take place in a relatively small area as compared to the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington DC. It decimated hundreds of square miles.
I agree with those who say that common decency says that you don't publish photos of the dead. Face it people, many of the news agencies, especially the big ones, in this country are just as interested in making a political statement as they are about reporting the news. The horrors that are taking place in the hurricane-ravaged areas are bad enough without adding photographs of dead bodies to "make a point".
Respectfully,
Mike |
|
Ryan Rayburn, Photographer
|
Crystal Lake | IL | USA | Posted: 11:54 PM on 09.07.05 |
->> Richard,
Respectfully, you're not understanding what Scott was saying. It is the journalists decision to decide what they publish or not. Decency is extremely important in the decisions we have had to face in the last week as we edited photos from the hurricane for our newspaper. We have had plently of discusions as we decided the A1 photo for the next day. We take it seriously.
It is not FEMA's or any other government agency, local or federal, job to be the one to decide what is decent and what is not or what we cover or what we don't.
This is extremely tough times for everyone involved.
But when the government starts to have a say in what the media cover..........its a slippery slope.
Let's keep this discusion going because it is an important issue. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
 |
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 1:02 AM on 09.08.05 |
| ->> trust me. this will get worse. fema is seriously opposed to journalist's reporting the recovery process (as they want to call it). they are in a serious CTA mode. (COVER THEIR ASS) I'm not blaming FEMA for anything, response time, moving resources and such but I heard a rumor today (there are plenty of those going around) that the airspace may be closed down so aerials can't be made at some of the places where there are lots of casualties. a local tv station reported tonight that there are several assisted living centers with 30-50 dead and a warehouse where over 100 people drowned. FEMA ordered more than 25,000 body bags. I've been doing this long enough to know it's a complete cop out for the government to say "they want to respect the rights of the dead and their families". (SEE FILE: NO PHOTOS OF FLAG DRAPED COFFINS FILE) no publication I know would use a photo of a dead body that could be identified, hell in my 30 years of doing this I've had ONE photo of a body published. ONE. UNO. and that was over 20 years ago. we just hardly do that here in the good ole U.S. of A. The current regime is sticking their head in the sand and whistling through the graveyard. Lots of people died here, the city has been dealt a blow which will take a long time to recover. But trying to use "the dignity of the dead" card is an insult to both the survivors and the poor souls who lost their lives. |
|
Jeff Gritchen, Photographer
|
Long Beach | CA | USA | Posted: 1:15 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> "The United States Government dropped the ball on this one. They were faster to repond to the tsunami"
The NO government droped the ball - complete and total awful disaster planing - and NO the tsunami response was not faster.
but YES, we as journalists should be able to cover every aspect of this disaster. As I read it they are 'asking' that dead bodies not be photographed - this is very different then the edict that came down 'forbiding' pictures of flag draped coffins |
|
Will Powers, Photographer
 |
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 2:29 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> I don't think it is the responsibility of the government agencies to provide transportation to journalists. It is a courtesey that is extended. If CNN or the Times wants photos, get a boat and follow the rescue/recovery vehicles around. Don't get in their way.
As Reuters explained it, in a paraphrased way, is what FEMA said. |
|
D. Ross Cameron, Photographer
 |
Oakland | CA | USA | Posted: 3:32 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> First: if you've never taken a picture that made somebody call you up and scream in your ear about what an insensitive prick you are, you're not covering the news.
Because, unless your beat is Disneyland, there are some ugly things going on out there, and it is a sure bet that someone will be unhappy with your depicting it for the world. (Actually, have you been to Disneyland recently? Geez...!)
Second: let's face it, FEMA is, as Mr. Liddy pointed out, in serious CTA mode. The government response -- local, state and federal -- to the Katrina catastrophe has been nothing short of gross negligence.
Looking at the pictures coming out of the hurricane zone, I almost thought I was seeing pictures from some faraway land. I'd say the only thing missing was Sally Struthers wandering through, gazing soulfully into the camera and saying, "For just nine cents a day, you can bring a smile to this little girl!"
Finally: "Common decency?" Don't make me laugh! The media should not look the other way to help the government save face over the deaths of people they chose to ignore while they were still living.
DRC |
|
Nick Layman, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Albuquerque | NM | | Posted: 3:54 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> We its the media not fighting it. Granted there is fine members that will fight for a picture but I saw on the nightly news report a journalist bowed down to the request of FEMA. "We were asked not to film the bodies of recovery efforts."
I know its apples and oranges but when that Marine shot a insurgent the military asked not to show the face of the Marine. I know there is a fine line of just bizzare gruesome pictures and powerful images. Most photogs in NOLA and Miss are trained professionals and can create a powerful image. I just hope the people in NOLA are fighting this policy. D. Ross is right about looking the other way. We need to document the mis steps of the three branches of government. |
|
Lucas Jackson, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Dave Yoder, Photographer
|
Milan | IT | Italy | Posted: 7:07 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> Mike,
While I understand and respect your opinion, I think you're slighting the primary duty of the press.
This story is first and foremost about death. The events that transpired are shocking, and not showing the full extent of their awfulness will only pave the way for such things to happen again. Arguably, much of the flooding was preventable.
The world is a better place today because there exist photos from the Holocaust to remind us of the horrors of genocide. New Orleans is probably an example of the consequences of inept government, and the world will be a better place if a full visual record is made of the catastrophe. It's no coincidence the government is suddenly interested in deciding what is appropriate for the media to publish when it's their dirtly laundry hanging out for all to see.
I'm an expat now, and have a hard time comprehending that I'm seeing these and other things out of the same country I left only four years ago. Seen from afar, it's almost Conradian. What every happened to priorities and accountability? |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 7:30 AM on 09.08.05 |
| ->> fema wasn't "asking" in new orleans...it's more like a rule......no one on recovery boats |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 9:29 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> FEMA, by way of the National Guard and other law enforcement guarding the area, control the perimeter. As several shooters have pointed out...you can't get into New Orleans without a law enforcement escort. So in essence FEMA can keep you from covering the story. If you follow along in your own boat and take photos of bodies, it is doubtful that they will let your boat into the area the next time around.
Has anyone been denied access yet? Unknown. If someone has been denied access they could sue. But given the current mood of the government, the courts, and the country as a whole, it's difficult to imagine that kind of lawsuit succeeding.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. |
|
Mike Ullery, Photographer
|
Troy | OH | USA | Posted: 10:31 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> Dave,
You are pretty much making my point. New Orleans is not the consequence "of an inept government". As I stated, it was a hurricane, a natural disaster. Our government didn't do it. President Bush did not order a hurricane.
Everything going on should be photographed and documented for future education and historical archives. But my point is, that the immediate publication of some of the more grusome details is being done by some publications for political purposes more than news.
During WWII, photographs of dead American servicemen were not allowed to be published for quite some time. This is not the first time that the government has put a lid on publication.
While I don't know this, I still suspect that much of FEMA's reasoning for keeping journalists out of boats, etc. is that they are responsible for the safety of ALL citizens, including journalists....and if there is a seat in a boat taken up by a journalist, that space could be used to hold one more rescued individual.
I'm all for freedom of the press and the First Amendment. But that all has to be balanced with what is right for each and every situation. Unfortuately, there are no easy answers. Journalists get their toes stepped on...FEMA and other agencies get called on the carpet for holes in planning. It will all get sorted out. In the meantime, I'm sure that we all are more interested in seeing that every person who can be brought to safety is rescued. THAT is the highest priority.
Mike |
|
Mike Ullery, Photographer
|
Troy | OH | USA | Posted: 10:38 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> By the way, our local CBS affiliate TV station ran a photo on it's website today of two dead bodies, in body bags, on a bridge. Is anyone sure that FEMA is not attempting to control more of what type of dead body shots are published? A corpse in a body bag still is obviously a dead body, but there is some semblence of decency/respect there.
Mike |
|
Geoff Miller, Photographer
|
Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 10:46 AM on 09.08.05 |
| ->> Well, seeing as I'm still seeing body photos popping up on Yahoo and the media coverage of the nursing home where they've found 30 bodies alone, it appears that the jackboot of oppression isn't quite on the throat of the media just yet in this area. If things start to happen beyond the actions of a lone stressed out Guardsman or low level official, then let's make a ruckus. |
|
Mark Smith, Photographer
|
Elk City | OK | USA | Posted: 10:52 AM on 09.08.05 |
| ->> Headline News: FEMA Botches Oppression of Media |
|
Jason Jump, Photographer
 |
Humble | TX | USA | Posted: 10:56 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> Well we know the ole saying about opinions . . . so I'll give mine.
It is very easy to see even from the posts here that we have journalists that are trying to push a political agenda instead of covering the news.
Case in point I was watching a news service the other day and the reporter was doing a story over how faith has been involved in this tragedy. The reporter visited several different churches and talked to several different people about their faith and how it played a role in their lives at this time.
Then when the camera came back to the live shot as the reporter was throwing it back to the station he didn't make a comment on the story he just gave, he gave a comment on how the government was too slow in responding. Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out his deal.
And we have far too many "journalists" that are doing this than we would probably care to mention. The thing about it is most of these "journalists" are a lot better at subtlty.
Oh that is was just about reporting and covering the news. Please let's not kid ourselves. |
|
Douglas Tesner, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Traverse City | MI | USA | Posted: 11:06 AM on 09.08.05 |
->> I have to agree with Will Powers and his comments:
"I don't think it is the responsibility of the government agencies to provide transportation to journalists. It is a courtesey that is extended. If CNN or the Times wants photos, get a boat and follow the rescue/recovery vehicles around. Don't get in their way."
Stop crying, get your own boat and stay the hell out of the way! In fact how many of your guys that are doing the crying are down there. If you are you are spending to much time crying on SS.
Sorry, just my thought after reading this string. |
|
David Lienemann, Student/Intern
 |
Iowa City | IA | USA | Posted: 1:08 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> I've read what everyone's written, and this seems a little bit like the embeded journalist concept in Iraq. The government would take you along, but could control what you would see/shoot/transmit. If you wanted to go on your own you could get more. This seems to be more or less the same except FEMA doesn't want you embeded, but if I understand their position, what you go out and find on your own is your own business.
What I've seen nationally seems to be that there isn't a huge rush to publish photos of piles of corpses, but some papers, like the NYT will put a photo with a body on the cover. Whether this is right or not, I think should be up to the papers, who have an idea of what their readers want/should to see or be exposed to.
This subject is now up on washingtonpost.com for anyone who cares to read more about it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/08/AR200509080... |
|
Damon Moritz, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Woodbridge | Va. | USA | Posted: 5:40 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> From a Poynter.org article
>> FEMA: Photo Request "Not a Directive"
"COVERING KATRINA"
Covering Katrina.
By Meghan Martin
A FEMA spokesman said Thursday that the agency hopes news organizations won't show dead bodies as part of their coverage of Hurricane Katrina, but acknowledged that such coverage decisions lie with editors, not government officials. |
|
Damon Moritz, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
PJ Heller, Photographer
 |
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 7:41 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> And from a column in Thursday's WX Post, headlined, "Hiding Bodies Won't Hide Truth":
Cadavers have a way of raising questions.
When people see them, they wonder, how did they get dead?
When a lot of people see a lot of dead bodies, politicians begin thinking of damage control.
Full column at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/08/AR200509080... |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
 |
Tucson | AZ | USA | Posted: 8:09 PM on 09.08.05 |
| ->> My response to police and rescue personnel over coverage has always been this: I don't decide what crimes to investigate, where to place speed traps or how many rescue personnel respond to events and how to direct that response. By the same token, it's not your job to decide how and what will be reported from a news event - that's my job. |
|
Kenny Felt, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Uniontown | KS | USA | Posted: 8:35 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> Scott, I found your comment, "They are in fact asking that the historical record does not show the amounts of dead that occured from the govermental breakdown after Hurricane Katrina. As a historian, this is bothersome. As a photojournalist, this just seems wrong" bothersome to some degree. I haven't seen any fact that backs that statement up. To my knowledge, it wasn't the government's fault that they died. I think a mammoth hurricane - to which the residents of the Gulf Coast were well aware of - killed them. The people who stayed behind had the chance, and were urged, to leave. Yes, the government was slow to respond, but that doesn't leave it responsible for the deaths of the people who CHOSE to take the chance.
Maybe I'm wrong. |
|
Marie Hughes, Photographer
|
Fremont | CA | USA | Posted: 9:25 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> Kenny, I think you are wrong that most of those people chose to be there. In fact, most of those people had no choice at all about leaving. They were poor or in bad health or both. They had no cars. No relatives in other states to help them get out. No money to pay for the bus or a plane flight. So they stayed in their homes and hoped they wouldn't blow away. (Because it was better to be in a house than walking north when the storm hit.)
I've been listening to stories from survivors who were in that position and now they are running around town helping other people people who couldn't get out. This includes people in wheelchairs who'd been abandoned in nursing homes. These are not people who decided to ride out the storm due to obstinacy. Sure there were some like that -- there always are -- but some guy with no legs who lives in a nursing home assumes that the people working there will take care of him and has no way to take care of himself. Instead of being evacuated as they would reasonably expect to happen, the people in some nursing homes were abandoned to die.
There are tons of stories like that and it's kind of sickening to me to realize how many people there are out there that no one cares about.
Also, the main reason so many people died is that the levees broke and reason they broke is that the federal government cut off funds to maintain them properly over the years. This disaster had been predicted by many experts when trying to get funds for proper maintenance. Their predictions were ignored and the money spent elsewhere.
So IMO it's the federal government who made a choice and long before Katrina showed up. They choose not to take the threats of a large-scale disaster seriously and it shows. |
|
Scott Bort, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Chicago | Il | USA | Posted: 9:35 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> I might as well finish what I started. I should have known better to sneak in a political jab or two.
Kenny, if everything worked smoothly and correctly, things would have turned out differently then the present situation. It's up to the historians for the rest of our lifetimes to debate how this is will get put down in the books and how it will be taught to our children's children. My outrage stems from the original article on Reuters, which has now been amended. Take the picture, worry about publishing it later.
People are still studying the pictures after the dropping of the atomic bomb to reference the damage patterns, effects on civilians..etc etc
Document the event, all of the event, and worry about the publishing when you’re done.
This has been a very interesting discussion, thank you all for participating.
Scott |
|
Mike Ullery, Photographer
|
Troy | OH | USA | Posted: 9:43 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> Jeff,
I think that your ideas are right and for the most part accepted and even welcomed by law enforcement...at least in our part of the country, (Mid West).
What we are dealing with here, though, is a catastrophe so immense that no one is quite sure what to do and where to go. This has nothing to do with incompetence on their part. It just hasn't happened at this maganatude before and if it's not bad enough that government agencies have to deal with an huge natural disaster, there are many people in the US, mostly led by Democratic party elected officials (I'm not making this into a political debate, the Democrats are...just look at the partys of those who are ranting and raving the loudest), and the press, who are attempting to launch a lynch mob against FEMA, etc. instead of working to do whatever is necessary to fix the problem. Under these circumstances, the government agencies have to cover their own as-. If someone could get Hillary Clinton, for one, to quit seeking her third term running the country long enough to assist in solving problems rather than standing on her soapbox crying "it's his fault", "he did it", just maybe government officials wouldn't cast such jaundiced eyes at our friends in the press.
Under these kind of stressful and emergency conditions give the people who are running this operation a little latitude. Tempers are short. Stress is high. And, there are way too many photographers/journalists who are trying to act like the First Amendment trumps saving lives. Sorry, but it doesn't. I've quoted this famous line from 700WLW Radio's Gary Burbank before and it seems to fit here. In the words of one his his characters...we now seem to live in a country where "your right to know supercedes your right to exist". It's getting so that ain't a joke anymore.
Mike |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 9:44 PM on 09.08.05 |
->> Marie, the reason the levees broke is that they were never designed to withstand that level of storm, when the project was started in the *1960's* It amazes me still that even after Hurricane Betsy and Camille, nothing had been done for nearly 40 years.
But the infinite wisdom of computer modeling (which is also guiding policy in other environmental areas and is plaguing weather forecasting) suggested that that getting hit was something that would happen once every "two or three centuries." http://news.yahoo.com/s/krwashbureau/20050902/ts_krwashbureau/_wea_katrina_...
There's been too much kicking the can from Democrats and Republicans alike. This is the culmination of corruption and bad decision making from MANY administrations: local, state and federal. Again, administrators and legislators used the data to justify diverting money to other projects.
In fact, more money has been funneled to the Army Corps of Engineers for Louisiana projects. Much of it however, went to pork:
"But overall, the Bush administration's funding requests for the key New Orleans flood-control projects for the past five years were slightly higher than the Clinton administration's for its past five years. Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, the chief of the Corps, has said that in any event, more money would not have prevented the drowning of the city, since its levees were only designed to protect against a Category 3 storm. Strock also has said the marsh restoration project would not have done much to diminish Katrina's storm surge, which passed east of the coastal wetlands."
http://www.startribune.com/stories/125/5602732.html |
|
This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]
|| Sponsor Special Deals
SB-900 TTL AF Shoe Mount Speedlight
|
Available from:
Samy's Camera
|
Price: $499.95 |
Notes:
The SB-900 i-TTL Speedlight leads the Nikon Creative Lighting System delivering the portability, power and versatility to support any photographer's creative lighting imagination. SportsShooter.com users should call 866-726-9463 to get the special SportsShooter price.
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|