Jeannie Golden
jg488519@ohio.edu
WARNING: CONTAINS GRAPHIC IMAGE
Visual imagery at its heart, it meant to elicit emotion from
the viewer and we as human beings, are more likely to remember something that we
have had an emotional reaction to. Photojournalism is defined by the Meriam-Webster dictionary as, “journalism in which written
copy is subordinate to pictorial usually photographic presentation of news stories
or in which a high portion of pictorial presentation is used.” In essence, a
photojournalist is responsible for telling the story or reality through capture
moments in time.
Like all aspects of journalism, there are ethics that should
be followed and they are in many ways, similar to those of a journalist. Show
the truth. Don’t alter or manipulate the truth. But is there a line that should
not be crossed? Are some images too graphic to show? Should editors withhold
the truth of some images to spare the public or to preserve some aspect of character
for the subject of the photo? Perhaps.
Take, for example, photographer Nick Ut’s Pulitzer Prizing
winning photo “Napalm Girl”. The photo was taken in June of 1972 and captured children fleeing
from a napalm bombed area in Vietnam. In the center of the image is a naked adolescent
girl running toward him, terror and pain written all over her face. The image
is devastatingly haunting and viewed in context, should leave any normal human
being with a sense of profound sadness and heartbreak. The image is the epitome
of graphic.
 |
Nick Ut’s “Napalm Girl” (1972), 1973 Pulitzer Prize-winning
photograph
|
What you cannot see well in this black and white image, is
the skin peeling off of her tiny body. Why choose to publish such a graphic
image? Would it have been more ethical to protect the child’s modesty and
privacy in such a moment of pain and anguish? According to Mr. Ut, he was
concerned about this but it was the raw truth of the Vietnam War. It was something
the world needed to see and feel. If you get a chance, please watch the interview
Nick gave to NBCNews upon his retirement. It is a phenomenal glimpse into the
life of a renowned photojournalist.
Not all graphic images are as well-intended as “Napalm Girl”.
Some bring into question, why did the photographer take pictures instead of
help? In today’s society of cellphone video and immediate and viral publication
of photographs and images, do photographers have time to stop and think about the
ethics of putting an image up for consumption?
Take for example the New York Posts publishing of a
photograph taken of a man pushed into the path of an oncoming subway train.
The headline was “Doomed: Pushed on the Subway Track, This Man is About to
Die.” Talk of the Nation host Al Shapiro examined the ethical dilemma
publishing this photograph presented in his episode: Documenting Tragedy: The Ethics of Photojournalism. Both the New York Post and the
photographer who took the image stood by the photograph. Yet, many questioned
why the photographer took 49 images rather than help the victim. Why did he
leave him to die? Was that journalism or a lack of humanity toward the victim
and his family?
The context of the image plays a role in determining the ethical
decision of whether to publish or not. In the case of “Napalm Girl”, Nick Ut
was capturing the reality and terror of the Vietnam War. His image didn’t sugarcoat or soften the horrors happening and it was important for the public to see
unmanipulated, raw truth. Only then could they develop an informed perspective
of the war.
The photographer that captured a man on the subway moments from
death, did not have the same altruistic motivation. When asked why he didn’t
help, he simply said he was too far away to help. If I were that man’s family,
that excuse would be of no comfort to me. The photographer’s motivation seemed
to be selling the image. Was the image and example of the violence we are capable
of and therefore, raw truth? Yes, but at what cost to humanity? What cost was the image to the man’s
family?
I think it comes down to the choices we make as human
beings. Photojournalists and editors have a choice to make in publishing
graphic images and videos. The hope is that these individuals hold themselves
to a high level of ethical standards and that they ask themselves with each
video and image, what value is there in publishing the image? Is it for the
sake of the public or the sake of their wallets?
Hi Jeannie,
ReplyDeleteI liked that you brought up the question "why did the photographer take pictures instead of helping?" This is something I ask myself almost every time a new unethical video goes viral. In one way I think the videos are needed to help show the public that some of these issues we are facing are very real issues and need the attention. Other times I see a video of something happening and multiple people are recording instead of helping. I feel like people sometimes are more concerned with a few minutes of social media fame than the unethical dilemma that they are recording that is right in front of them.