A man falling to his death from the World Trade Center.
A starving child crawling to a feeding station as a vulture circles overhead.
A weather-battered woman pleading for help as she digs through rubble, searching for her infant after an F-5 tornado leveled her hometown.
These photos are the product of photographers’ split-second decisions about whether to click the camera shutter.
Photographers have a big decision to make each time they go to an assignment—to shoot or not to shoot. They must make these decisions while under deadline pressure and in the split second that news happens.
Many times, the images captured become our only documentation of history. They make us laugh. They make us cry. They help us remember.
Once a photo is submitted, it is up to the editor to determine how or if it should be delivered to the audience.
Medias’ role in informing the public of newsworthy issues through photography, without causing unnecessary harm, is at the heart of this week’s ethics question for my media law and ethics class.
Students were asked specifically to consider a photo that ran on the front page of a December issue of the New York Post.
The photo was of 58-year-old Ki Suk Han, who was attempting to avoid an oncoming train after being pushed onto the subway track. A freelance photographer, who happened to be on the platform at the time, shot the photo.
The Post was criticized for publishing the photo, which depicted the last seconds of the man’s life.
The photographer also has spoken out about the issue, saying he should not be criticized because he was attempting to use his camera’s flash to alert the train driver to stop.
I asked students to take a stance on the question:
“Should newspapers have run the photo of the man falling onto the subway rails?”
The Post‘s decision to run the photo is representative of those publication editors make regularly as they weigh their duty to inform the public with the possibility of causing harm.
I’d love for you to weigh in on the issue.
Let’s Talk Nerdy!
Should newspapers run photos of the last minutes or seconds of people’s lives? How should editors make decisions regarding running potentially traumatic photos?
danielalex_book says
Hi Kenna
This is a very complex issue.
Photography and other forms of visual media are really communication.
So what so different between words and pictures?
Why don’t pictures have the same ‘rights’ as words; ie. first amendment protection.
From my comments, I assume most people think that I think it’s okay to send out such pictures, but no, actually I don’t think it’s okay.
The thing is all media businesses are doing what they have to do to survive.
What needs to change is consumers and customers of (of all businesses really).
If we want change, we need to change, not companies out there.
One more thing, I don’t believe the photographer when he said he should not be criticized because he was attempting to use his camera’s flash to alert the train driver to stop.
Ya right!
profkrg says
danielalex_book One key difference to me is the importance of images in truly capturing our history. I don’t think this photo is an example, but there are many traumatic photos that help us understand things that happened in the past. Photos of the Holocaust are a great example. Photos capture moments in time that words cannot fully express. It’s a tough issue.
Thanks for reading and commenting.
Kenna
danielalex_book says
profkrg danielalex_book It is a tough issue, as who gets to decide what’s truly capturing history and what isn’t?
profkrg says
danielalex_book I guess that is the rough thing about history. You can’t identify it until after the fact.
journtoolbox says
“@profkrg: Capturing Trauma: The Ethics of News Photography http://t.co/QprrrbxXSN #media #ethics #journalism #photography”
j_kaepernik says
Regarding the photographer who took the photo:
– According to the attached article, the man who was pushed was located at approximately 50th St. The photographer was located at approximately at 49th St. Even without knowing exactly how fast the train was going before it slowed down, I’d still say it was unlikely the photographer would have had time to reach and pull the man off the tracks without endangering his own life. (The man, however, who pushed the victim onto the tracks, is still unaccounted for at the same time and made no attempt [according to the article] to save the man.
– While using a flash to get someone’s attention seems silly, it was probably the only thing the photographer could do that would have had a chance of making a difference on the outcome. Also by looking at photo, the train did not nearly have enough space to slow down. The man was dead the minute he hit those tracks.
Regarding the Post for publishing:
– I doubt this would have passed “breakfast test.” However, it is the media’s job to capture and record events in history as accurately as possible. This was a tragic end to a man’s life, but it might make a difference in someone else’s.
Overall:
– I have seen plenty of comments about how silly setting the flash off to alert the conductor is, yet I have not seen comments regarding the man who put the victim on the tracks in the first place. Let’s assess and assign blame correctly on the bastard who killed a man because of his stupidity and not crack jokes about the guy who may/may not have done something silly in the few, short dramatic seconds he had. Four men will live with the consequences of a tragic accident because of one man.
– What would you have done if it were you?
j_kaepernik says
Personally, I think I have more of an issue with the headline than the photo. It seems caustic, careless and unfeeling (but not in an unbiased/objective way.) Much like the photos that came out of Vietnam, they define how we remember events and what meaning we associate with them. It’s never an easy call to decide what’s printable and what’s not.
freedom6662 says
profkrg journtoolbox #StopEnslavingSaudiWomen2
victorhannover1 says
profkrg journtoolbox http://victorhannover1.blogspot.com.br/2016/08/francinildo-santos-cameraman-shows.html