| 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
Politicians and Unflattering Photos
Ronnie Montgomery, Photographer
|
Joshua Lindsey, Photographer, Student/Intern
 |
Bowling Green | KY | United States | Posted: 2:05 PM on 04.17.11 |
| ->> Wasn't it ultimately the photographers fault for transmitting an unflattering photo of Boehner in the first place? |
|
Jason Jump, Photographer
|
Humble | TX | USA | Posted: 3:56 PM on 04.17.11 |
->> Knowing what the subject matter was pertaining to this story and the photo that needed to run with it, this was definitely not an appropriate selection.
Not sure I would "blame" the photographer for sending such a photo as within a certain context maybe there is a time and place for that type of photo so keep it on file, but you don't run it on page one with this story.
At least I would chosen to wait for a different photo. |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 4:35 PM on 04.17.11 |
| ->> Why should every photo of a politician be flattering? |
|
Mark Perlstein, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Plano | TX | USA | Posted: 8:12 PM on 04.17.11 |
| ->> I think the unflattering photo is a much better photo. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 10:25 PM on 04.17.11 |
->> I think Joshua makes a good point - why in the world would you transmit that image first? That's where the problem started. The transmission of a poor image first sealed the fate of the page editor.
Jim, we owe the politicians nothing. But when the image becomes a sticking point - becoming a news item in and of itself - then I think we could argue that we have failed in our mission to deliver news in a objective fashion. With someone who has White House experience like you do, Jim, I think you can see where I am coming from.
When I transmit, I usually try to transmit the image that tells the story best first if it all possible. I don't think I'm unusual in that respect. A unusual facial expression doesn't make a image automatically better.
It all comes down to the AP Photographer making a very strange choice to transmit first imho. The page editor took the beating as a result of that choice. |
|
Joshua Lindsey, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Bowling Green | KY | United States | Posted: 11:34 PM on 04.17.11 |
| ->> I don't think political journalism has to be flattering but should tell the story accurately and objectively. The photo editor was stuck between a rock and a hard place. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Princeton | IN | USA | Posted: 11:44 PM on 04.17.11 |
| ->> The thing to do hours during the budget meeting was to see if there could be an extended deadline. If not, there has to be hundreds of photos of John Boehner the paper could have used in a pinch. Write the cutline around the photo, not the photo around the cutline. There would have been no whining readers and the paper would have got out on time. |
|
Kevin M. Cox, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Galveston & Houston | TX | US | Posted: 1:12 AM on 04.18.11 |
->> Something to consider for those criticizing the photographer: In my experience the AP rarely transmits photos to memebers in the same order that I send them in. For example, just recently photo #107 moved six minutes sooner than photo #101.
However in this case it looks like that was the order they were sent. The "unflattering" shot is 124 while the second edition shot is 125. But for all we know the photographer transmitted them at the same time and the editor on the desk at AP got distracted by a phone call or restroom break which resulted in the gap in time between them moving to members on the wire. The photo doesn't go straight from the photographer to the newspaper so keep that in mind when assigning blame. But unless the photographer or AP editor chime in there is just no way to know.
Here is a video of the presser in question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqEipJ-VGZQ
I think Jeff has the right idea. Extend the deadline or plan to use a photo from earlier. There were 17 photos of John Boehner that moved earlier on that same day, all before 8 PM.
Personally I don't think the facial expression in the first shot is that bad. To me it almost conveys a sense of, "Whew, that was a close one." As the cutline reads it was, "Perilously close to a midnight deadline" so I'd guess the stressful look on his face fits the situation. |
|
John Germ, Photographer
|
Wadsworth | Oh | USA | Posted: 11:59 AM on 04.18.11 |
| ->> So, what I gather is that at least 3 individuals (photographer, AP Editor, PD News editor) all had opportunity to review the photo and all 3 decided there wasn't anything wrong with using it. To me, that's a systematic breakdown. I concur with Michael, for a News story the photo should be as neutral as possible. Whether there is actual bias or not, perception is often more important than the truth. The fact that 3 individuals all had the chance to throw the image in the trash bin and none did results in a perception of bias. Leave the unflattering photos for campaigns to use in their propaganda. If there's only one photo things are different, but in the case of a major politician, that's hardly the case. If the story isn't a neutral news story, things are different (i.e. I wouldn't expect a neutral photo in a story of former politician Dimora being arrested) |
|
Luke Sharrett, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | United States | Posted: 3:22 PM on 04.18.11 |
| ->> Does the photo tell the story or not? I think it does. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Princeton | IN | USA | Posted: 4:43 PM on 04.18.11 |
| ->> I have to disagree, I don't believe it tells a story at all. He looks awful. If it were a look of exasperation, that would be more storytelling. But it looks like something in between what he was doing and what he was going to do. |
|
Scott Evans, Photographer
|
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 5:06 PM on 04.18.11 |
| ->> Personally, I find it ironic that objective journalism should be overly concerned about how a political figure is "portrayed". I don't mean that in a glib manner as it might seem, but if we only go for flattering images then we've slanted the table of objectivity in the opposite direction. I do agree that neutrality is best and that its unfortunate when the image becomes the story but if Boehner doesn't want to look goofy, then don't make yourself look so, you know the cameras are on. All that said, the desk editor should have had more than one or two images to select from even under the deadline and surely there had to be something more neutral. I'd say that's where the fault lies, if any, here. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|