Not Going Out on a Limb (Gruesome)

wxwax

Here's a link to a story about newspaper editing news photographs. In the example cited, newspapers removed a severed arm from shots of the Spanish train attacks.

Whaddya think? Prudent or unnecessary?

GREAPER

Prudent

In a recent accident here in my home town a number of workers died in a bad construction accident. Our local paper published a photo that showed a dead construction worker hanging from the wreckage in his fall protection harness.

I am a construction worker and I can tell you we all felt that the photo was totally inapropriate. The paper can run the story about the accident, they can publish photos that show the devastation of the accident. There is no need to publish the photo showing a dead man hangin from the structure. They did not even know who all was missing yet, let alone who was dead. How would you like to see your missing father hanging dead on the front page. How would you like it if thats how you found out?


Publishing the horrific details is sensationalism. Sellin papers with other peoples blood.

I am not sure that cloning the offensive portion of the photo out is the best way, choosing another photo or cropping the one you have would be better or at least a censor mark of some kind that is an obvious censor.


Yelling at the editor is only part of the problem. The editor cannot include it if you dont shoot it. We talk of ethics about aproaching a birds nest and we all agree that stressing the bird is unacceptable. Apparently showing a woman with her arm ripped off in a horrible wreck is ok. Never mind the greiving families or the maimed woman, sell the papers.

Every time I click the shutter I decide what is in the frame and what is not. The photographer should have decided NOT.


I dont need to SEE maimed babies to be horrified by the fact that there are maimed babies.

Just my opinion.

lynnma

GREAPER wrote:

Prudent

In a recent accident here in my home town a number of workers died in a bad construction accident. Our local paper published a photo that showed a dead construction worker hanging from the wreckage in his fall protection harness.

I am a construction worker and I can tell you we all felt that the photo was totally inapropriate. The paper can run the story about the accident, they can publish photos that show the devastation of the accident. There is no need to publish the photo showing a dead man hangin from the structure. They did not even know who all was missing yet, let alone who was dead. How would you like to see your missing father hanging dead on the front page. How would you like it if thats how you found out?


Publishing the horrific details is sensationalism. Sellin papers with other peoples blood.

I am not sure that cloning the offensive portion of the photo out is the best way, choosing another photo or cropping the one you have would be better or at least a censor mark of some kind that is an obvious censor.


Yelling at the editor is only part of the problem. The editor cannot include it if you dont shoot it. We talk of ethics about aproaching a birds nest and we all agree that stressing the bird is unacceptable. Apparently showing a woman with her arm ripped off in a horrible wreck is ok. Never mind the greiving families or the maimed woman, sell the papers.

Every time I click the shutter I decide what is in the frame and what is not. The photographer should have decided NOT.


I dont need to SEE maimed babies to be horrified by the fact that there are maimed babies.

Just my opinion.

Well said Greaper... we are all individually responsible for our actions and our interactions with others, we can choose to be honorable and kind or not.
Lynn

Seamaiden

While I do not like to see such pictures, I also feel that they remove a thick layer of insulation, especially here in America. Life can be ugly, and refusing to look often allows many people to brush certain things off, such as this attack in Spain.

Greaper, your case is clearly a case of awful timing and a disregard for the families. This was a local event, and I'm guessing that this man could have been identified in the photograph. This instance is one where, in my opinion, it should be easy for the paper to make a determination as to whether or not the picture should be published. And in this case I would have to agree with you, shared means of making a living or not.

However, in the case of the Spanish train attacks, we can't possibly know who that arm belonged to, and we're additionally forced to address the GRIM reality of the seriously messed up things people do to each other. Sometimes I think we need that. Not to point of deadening our reactions, but enough to give us pause to stop and think, really think, of what it's like to be in another's shoes. I have found in my neck of the woods that it is too common and too easy for folks to disengage from certain realities of life. It's at this point that it could get political, and I'll save that stuff for another board.

wxwax

I tend to agree with Sea Maiden. It was a horrific event, and i personally have no problems showing it for what it was.

From a practical standpoint, it sounds as though it would have been extremely difficult for the photographer not to show severed limbs or bloody body wreckage - the scene was littered with them. So I'm reluctant to upbraid him.

Seamaiden

Upbraid.. that shall be the word of the week!