| 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
Ethical Question- Front Page for Shooting Victim?
Greg Kendall-Ball, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Abilene | TX | USA | Posted: 11:50 PM on 07.28.10 |
->> A friend of mine who is a lawyer in American Samoa chatted me up tonight to ask me about this situation.
A cop was gunned down outside the local courthouse the other day. The newspaper ran graphic images of the shooting (a cameraman captured the whole thing) on the front page.
Apparently, it has sparked quite the controversy over there, as the public is criticizing the paper for its insensitivity.
You can see the news article about the shooting, and some low-res images, here.
http://samoanews.com/viewstory.php?storyid=17213&edition=1279879200
For one, it's incredible that the actual shooting was caught from this close range.
As a news story, this seems significant. Would you have run graphic, uncensored photos on the front page, above the fold? What are the ethical demands in a situation like this? |
|
Greg Kendall-Ball, Photographer, Assistant
|
Matthew Hinton, Photographer, Assistant
 |
New Orleans | LA | USA | Posted: 12:15 AM on 07.29.10 |
->> It's a case of distance and subject matter.
It's because it's a cop. If it was a lawyer or politician they probably react differently.
At a paper I used to work at they ran a picture of dead police officer that was so tiny that it took a good minute of looking at the image to actual realize there was a cop in the photo. It wasn't even graphic because the body was so small in the photo. But we got more mail and phone calls about that image then any other before because it was a cop.
Burned dead bodies from Iraq: okay, no complaints, no letters or phone calls, no ethical quandaries. But a local cop. . . |
|
Max Gersh, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
New Castle | IN | USA | Posted: 12:32 AM on 07.29.10 |
->> I don't think there will be a definitive answer here nor should there be. Every case like this should be judged situationally.
Let me start out by saying I have a hard time passing judgment on the photos that were run without seeing them as printed (size, caption, etc.)
I know my paper has a no graphic/gory images policy. I don't agree with that 100%.
I think that when the graphic images are needed to tell the story, they should be run. It is not the editorial departments job to be afraid of retaliation from the public. It is our job to tell the story accurately and to the best of our ability.
When an image doesn't add anything to the story other than shock value, it probably isn't worth running, let alone on A1.
It is a delicate balance that should be weighed between the editorial staff before publication. |
|
Jack Megaw, Photographer, Assistant
|
Philadelphia | PA | America | Posted: 1:05 AM on 07.29.10 |
->> My opinion when it comes to this kind of image is not if it is gorey, or 'inappropriate for public viewing,' but if it will benefit the readers and the community in any way. If the picture is being ran just to sell papers and no other reason then there is a problem.
I would argue that this image does benefit the community because it enlightens the public. If I was in the editor's shores I wouldn't feel like I was doing a disservice to journalism as well as the readers if I held the image back and just published the written story.
Although there will always be complaints if a publication runs an images like this, I feel the ends justify the means so I would run the image on the cover.
Since it is a police officer I see even more reason to run the picture. |
|
Jack Megaw, Photographer, Assistant
|
Philadelphia | PA | America | Posted: 1:07 AM on 07.29.10 |
->> Correction sorry:
I would argue that this image does benefit the community because it enlightens the public. If I was in the editor's shoes* I would* feel like I was doing a disservice to journalism as well as the readers if I held the image back and just published the written story. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 3:16 AM on 07.29.10 |
| ->> In this case, it happened on the courthouse steps in full public view and with the media in view, I don't have a problem with it. To deny the images, a story telling device, is to almost self edit. I say it is appropriate. |
|
Wesley R. Bush, Photographer
 |
Nashville | TN | U.S. | Posted: 9:23 AM on 07.29.10 |
->> I think the question to always ask is "What purpose does it serve?" Yes, it is a very rare and compelling image, but is that a reason for running it? "Look what we saw?" If a man is shot and killed, does it help the reader envision the shooting by including the act itself?
I admit, when I worked at a newspaper, I was hardcore. Run everything. The truth is ugly sometimes, and newspapers are for printing all aspects of life. But I've been out of the newspaper bubble for several years now, and I'm finding it harder to stick to my former mantra.
If that police officer were my father, husband, brother, friend... I'd forever be changed by seeing that photograph. True, his death alone would be tragic enough. But to SEE it. It's an image that would never escape me. And why? Because it was caught on tape? It would deeply disturb me to know that people who never knew the man -- who never sat down and ate breakfast with the man or heard one of his jokes that he forgets he's told 100 times, or any of those other intimate details of a person's life that snap into perspective after they're gone -- complete strangers would see him at the worst point in his life, and that's all they would get. Sure, they'd get the follow-up stories and 10-year-old photos of the man, but all they'd remember is the shooting picture.
I'm not saying it should never be run. I just don't know what purpose it serves in this particular case. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|