Photojournalism sucks :( - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

04/01/2005 08:42:52 PM · #1

I work as a photojournalist for the campus newspaper, and last night I was assigned to take photos of something really tragic that happened to a group of my good friends. I started to take photos, and everyone started yelling at me. I tried again, but the guilt got to me and I had to give my camera to my editor and let her finish taking the photos. Today a photo was put out of them crying and hugging, and now even though the photo shown wasn't one I took, everyone is pissed off and won't speak to me (or if they do, it's to tell me what a bad person I am).

I would really like to hear some of your opinions on this.. Do you guys think I did the wrong thing? I really felt, and still feel, like it was important to record that moment, to show the world how much this meant to them and how much of their heart was put into it. I feel like I did the right thing, but at the same time, I know that if it happened to me, I wouldn't want cameras shoved in my face recording me at my lowest.

Do y'all think it's unethical to take pictures of people greiving, and run the risk of making the pain worse for them? Or do you think it's more important to record the truth as it is? Are there any professional photojournalists out there, and if so, how do you deal with this issue?

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

04/01/2005 08:49:32 PM · #2

I'm not a photojournalist, but I say if it's your job to get the pictures, then get the pictures. Real friends will eventually realize that you were only doing your job.

longlivenyhc

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for Canon

04/01/2005 08:54:12 PM · #3

Originally posted by micknewton:

I'm not a photojournalist, but I say if it's your job to get the pictures, then get the pictures. Real friends will eventually realize that you were only doing your job.

i agree

LevT

OM System OM-1

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

04/01/2005 09:01:51 PM · #4

I disagree. If the job obligations interfere with friendship obligations, I'd put friendship first. At least you could try to get away from that assignment, your editor would probably understand and give it to somebody else. Also I'm sure your friends would take it much easier if a photojournalist taking pictures of them grieving was not somebody they knew well and expected to grieve with them... Just my opinion.

Message edited by author 2005-04-01 21:25:11.

petrakka

04/01/2005 09:09:51 PM · #5

What you did isn't unethical, it's just a very unfortunate situation. Nobody likes to deal with cameras in the moments of a tragic event. Maybe years down the road they will appreciate it, and if they don't...when emotions have calmed from the event they may realize the situation you were faced with, and appreciate the fact that you gave the camera to your editor even. They shouldn't be mad at you because the picture is published. That is out of your control, and if you didn't take the shots, it would have been someone else. (which is essentially what happened it sounds like, because you handed off your camera)

fstopopen

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/01/2005 09:31:02 PM · #6

you know, not everybody is cut out for it. First off, you can't let what your friends say get to you, that will pass. But some people don't have the guts for this kind of shooting. I, too, am one of them. I am a video professional, but I think my story applies well to still photos too. I began my carrer in news as an editor and then became a videographer for the local fox station. I was lucky that almost entirely I was sent to do feature stories because of my shooting style. well, two years later, we had a cutback in personelle and I found myself shooting all kinds of stories. I will never forget 2 instances. 1. Having to knock on the door of a woman who's baby had just been kidnapped and killed in a voilent manner, then ask her how she feels and such. I was devistated. 2. being sent to a "crime scene". my assignment editor didn't know what happened, just that police and ambulance had been sent to a park. I was the first photographer there and the tape hadn't even been set up. I started walking with camera in tow to ask a policeman what had happened, when I looked under a park bench and there was a man lying face down in a pool of blood. while I write this I can still smell that decomposing body. I got my "artistic" shots of a man's hand, etc... and left. It was after that that I realized I no longer wanted to shoot for the news. I got lucky and found a documentary unit here that was looking for a videographer, and I have been very happy ever since. Just because you want to be a photographer, doesn't mean that you have to be a photojournalist. I didn't have the stomach for it. some do, some don't. It doesn't make you weak or anything, it just makes you human. Go find something you LIKE to shoot, and shoot it well.

drake

deapee

Kodak V803

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

04/01/2005 09:45:11 PM · #7

You were put into a rough situation there. I think everyone knows my stand on this because I've voiced my opinion before...if I see someone get run over by a car, I'll take their picture...and I'll take pictures of their friend watching in horror...now on the other hand, if it was my friend, I wouldn't think about taking the picture, I'd go help. Sometimes work gets personal, and you gotta draw the line somewhere.

Don't worry about it -- what's done is done, you can't change that. You did what you did, they can either accept it or not. The ball is in their court.

I think too often people worry themselves to death (and don't tell me you're not worried, because obviously you are).

Excuse me while I ramble on here for a moment. Let's say Person A and Person B both lost their jobs and can't make their car payment. Person A worries himself to sick all day about it until the repo people finally come get their car while Person B says well, I still have a roof over my head -- the worst that is going to happen is they're going to take my car. Now Person A is sleep-deprived, worried, has an ulcer, and no car. Person B has no car, but at least he's peaceful inside and healthy. Seriously though, don't sweat the small stuff -- and in reality, anything that happens in this world is considered 'small' -- nothing is worth getting you upset in the big scheme of things, life is too short.

crockettdl

Nikon D100

04/01/2005 10:13:01 PM · #8

I'm a photojournalist in the Marine Corps and have been for 14 years. During the Iraq war and other assignments, I took photos of many sad and horrific things including dead bodies, poverty, homeless, enemy prisoners, battles and much more.
It is very difficult to take photos of a barefoot four-year-old child in the middle of nowhere as he looks at you and then keep moving. It's hard to take a picture of a burned body.
There are many images I've captured that I don't look at. It can be a very hard job at times. In fact, suicide is quite high among photojournalists, especially ones who have been in war.
However, there are two things that make up for it.
First, if no one has the courage to take the hard shots, then those moments of tragedy will fade and be forgotten. Photos make people remember, and hopefully keep from letting it happen again. I've met many people who thought I was horrible for taking pictures of the dead, but, I look at it as honoring them because they now won't be forgotten.
Second, There are many wonderful photos I've taken that I have on my wall and don't go a day without looking at them because they show the happiness and good of life...The cheering people we liberated as we drove through Baghdad, Orphans being cared for with love by nuns, children receiving their first school books.
I'm not going to lie, it's a hard job and hard to stay detached from your work. Sometimes you have to get involved. At an orphanage in Africa I took many photos at, I also fed and played with the children. It was wonderful.
In situations like yours, you need to step back and get shots from a distance with a zoom lense, so you don't tread on anyone's feelings. That may make it easier. In your face journalism doesn't work too well.
But, ultimately, you have to decide if the photo is worth it enough and will inevitably make a positive impact.
Hope this helped.
If you have any other questions, I'd be glad to help.

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/01/2005 11:00:32 PM · #9

Originally posted by mffnqueen:

...Do y'all think it's unethical to take pictures of people greiving, and run the risk of making the pain worse for them? Or do you think it's more important to record the truth as it is?...

I can't find anything unethical about taking pictures of people grieving. I feel, however, that doing so without great sensitivity could be a considerable transgression and, possibly, highly offensive.

I would try to consider the emotional circumstances, the location, all of the people involved and my own potential role (if any) in the recording of it. I would try, as much as possible, to plan ahead and take my shots either from a distance or up-close, calmly, respectfully and in a dignified manner.

For close-ups, I would make my intentions clear before the shoot, to leave no doubts as to the nature of the pictures I intend to take including their purpose, merit and use. In the event that my endeavour be declined, I would not take any pictures, period.

These are chances we take as photographers. Subjects, especially grieving, human ones, IMO, should be spared any part in it.

gwphoto

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

04/01/2005 11:06:05 PM · #10

If you want honesty, here it is. Suck it up and do the job or learn a lesson and move on to a different type of photography. You may not be cut out for that field, I am NOT that is for sure. I use to be the photographer for the police dept I worked for. I had to photograph things I would never do on my own. Good Luck.

Stagolee

Kodak Easyshare C180

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

04/01/2005 11:08:37 PM · #11

I personally think it is crossing the boundary of your friendship and you should respect your friends in their grieving phase.
Ask yourself whats more important the picture or your friends?

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/01/2005 11:11:30 PM · #12

Originally posted by gwphoto:

That was not only honest but also crude.

vtruan

Nikon D5100

Tamron AF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical for Nikon

04/01/2005 11:12:12 PM · #13

Sometimes just shooting the site where it happend, or other related things work too. Like the building where the person jumped from, the landing spot, or something similar. This way ya don't have to get involved directly with the emotions.

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

04/02/2005 12:31:51 AM · #14

Originally posted by mffnqueen:

I work as a photojournalist for the campus newspaper, and last night I was assigned to take photos of something really tragic that happened to a group of my good friends. I started to take photos, and everyone started yelling at me. I tried again, but the guilt got to me and I had to give my camera to my editor and let her finish taking the photos. Today a photo was put out of them crying and hugging, and now even though the photo shown wasn't one I took, everyone is pissed off and won't speak to me (or if they do, it's to tell me what a bad person I am).
I would really like to hear some of your opinions on this.. Do you guys think I did the wrong thing? I really felt, and still feel, like it was important to record that moment, to show the world how much this meant to them and how much of their heart was put into it. I feel like I did the right thing, but at the same time, I know that if it happened to me, I wouldn't want cameras shoved in my face recording me at my lowest.

Do y'all think it's unethical to take pictures of people greiving, and run the risk of making the pain worse for them? Or do you think it's more important to record the truth as it is? Are there any professional photojournalists out there, and if so, how do you deal with this issue?

I think you need to sleep on it before you make any final judgements on this situation, maybe two nights. Your post comes across as very emotionally charged to me. You ask us to help you with this dilema but we don't know the details.

Here are a few random thoughts that spring to mind.
--Perhaps your editor should have been more sensative in making the assignment, or just taken the shots herself if she was on the scene anyway.
--Photojournalism is not shoving a camera in someone's face, that is papparazzi.
--Photojournalism doesn't suck. But some of the assignments photojournalists get suck. And some photojournalists suck.

Give it some time and see if reason doesn't come back into play to balance out some of the emotion. I sincereley hope that you, your friends and your editor can remain on good terms while dealing with the tragedy that has struck your campus.

Message edited by author 2005-04-02 00:33:34.

Physics_Guru

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

04/02/2005 12:57:52 AM · #15

If they were not your freinds, would it have bothered you?

We can argue ethics and job descriptions all day and really not get anywhere. I would say that it would depend on what happened. If someone they all knew and cared about got hit by a bus or something like that, then I would say keep the camera away. If it was them losing a tournament or something like that, I would say take the picture. But these are based on my personal ethics and others may not agree.

As a photojournalist, you are supposed to tell the news. Whether you are the guy taking the pictures or the one typing up the story, it is all the same. If they cannot understand that then..... crap.

But for me personally it would depend on what happened.

04/02/2005 02:09:54 AM · #16

Originally posted by coolhar:

You ask us to help you with this dilema but we don't know the details.

You're right.. let me explain the situation a little better.

The event in question were the campus elections. Three of my friends were running for the top position (Yell Leader, if you know anything about Texas A&M), and they had poured just immense amounts of energy and spirit and dedication into their campaign, not to mention thousands of dollars and hours. To these guys, this election was their world, I don't think anything could mean more to a person than this position meant to them. Their campaign staff was also made up of some of my closest friends, as well. They did an amazing job, and I was 100% sure they were going to win, so I wasn't at all phased when my editor asked me to cover it. I thought, okay, cool, this is going to be an amazing moment for my friends, I would love to be the one to record it for them and get paid doing it.

Long story short, I ended up shooting a different candidate when the results were announced, and it hadn't even registered in my head that they had lost.. I took my shots, then wandered around and saw my editor. She grabbed me and said, "My battery died.. Quick, get some shots," so my first instinct is, okay, do what the boss says.. It wasn't until my friends started yelling at me that it all really sunk in.. So I stopped, took maybe one or two more shots, then I couldn't go any further and I just handed her my camera.

Furthermore, this whole thing happened at night, so it was pitch black, which meant I had to be close up and I had to use a flash, which really just adds insult to injury for these people.

I don't really feel badly about what I did.. I mean, I feel really bad that it may have made it harder for them, of course, but I still think it was important to take those shots.. I think every moment needs to be recorded, happy or sad, victory or defeat. If it were me, I might be annoyed when the picture was taken, but I would still want those photos to exist.

I really appreciate everyone's responses.. I guess I'm just struggling with the nature of photojournalism.. To me, it's the hardest form of journalism there is.. Writers can get their information through e-mail or over a phone, they can hide behind long distance communication, they can find a different source if theirs is upset, or they can at least wait until that person calms down.. Photographers can't, they have to be right there, right in the middle of the action, and they have only a split second to record that moment, or it's gone forever.

Can there really be ethics in photojournalism? You can't really stop to weigh the moral implications of taking a shot.. You either shoot, or you don't. I feel like it's mostly instinct, but if that's true, does shooting on instinct make you innately unethical or insensitive? Obviously there's no right answer, but it's an interesting thought.

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

04/02/2005 02:16:15 AM · #17

Originally posted by Physics_Guru:

If they were not your freinds, would it have bothered you?

Yeah.. Not as much, but I think it would bother me to take a picture of anyone in pain.. There have been several times when I've seen people injured or upset over something, and I just KNEW if I took the photo it would definitely run, but I couldn't do it. I don't think it's unethical or wrong, I just couldn't do it. I guess I'm not cut out for this :( Shhh, don't tell my boss.. On the other hand, I really like this field, and I wouldn't mind sticking around in it.. But if I did, I would definitely have to come to terms with this issue. Hmm...

Originally posted by Physics_Guru:

If someone they all knew and cared about got hit by a bus or something like that, then I would say keep the camera away. If it was them losing a tournament or something like that, I would say take the picture.

Out of curiosity, why the distinction? Someone getting hit by a bus is a lot more newsworthy than losing a tournament. I personally feel like grief is grief, regardless of what it's over.

coolhar

04/02/2005 03:05:10 AM · #18

Originally posted by mffnqueen:

Originally posted by Physics_Guru:
If they were not your freinds, would it have bothered you?

Yeah.. Not as much, but I think it would bother me to take a picture of anyone in pain.. There have been several times when I've seen people injured or upset over something, and I just KNEW if I took the photo it would definitely run, but I couldn't do it. I don't think it's unethical or wrong, I just couldn't do it. I guess I'm not cut out for this :( Shhh, don't tell my boss.. On the other hand, I really like this field, and I wouldn't mind sticking around in it.. But if I did, I would definitely have to come to terms with this issue. Hmm...

Originally posted by Physics_Guru:
If someone they all knew and cared about got hit by a bus or something like that, then I would say keep the camera away. If it was them losing a tournament or something like that, I would say take the picture.

Out of curiosity, why the distinction? Someone getting hit by a bus is a lot more newsworthy than losing a tournament. I personally feel like grief is grief, regardless of what it's over.

Not to make light of the let down your friends suffered after putting so much of themselves into the campaign, or the trauma your psyche went thru, but it's not the end of the world. No one died or was physically injured. And there are valuable lessons being learned. This may sound like a kind of harsh thing to say, but I think you are doing a job that you haven't had full training for. Not that you can't take a picture with the best of them, but that you don't know the answers to the ethical questions that arise in the routine performance of your job. Too bad you aren't currently enrolled in a course organized around ethics in photojournalism. This whole situation would make for a great classroom discussion with some guidance from a knowledgable professor helping find the answers to your questions instead of us dpc'ers trying to slog thru it with you.

Two suggestions
1. After the dust settles have a staff meeting of your colleagues at the paper, lay it all out including the emotional ups & downs you have endured, and see how that group feels about the things you are having such a hard time with.
2. Make a copy of this thread and put it in a big envelpoe. Put in some copies of the shots you took, whatever stories the paper ran, and a few pages of notes containing your personal feelings during this time. Seal it up and keep it safe. Open it up and read it over in about 15 years. It will give you a unique insight into youself.

BobsterLobster

Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

04/02/2005 06:25:54 AM · #19

Maybe I've misunderstood, but if they just lost some kind of election I would have thought they would have understood that they were very much in the public eye. I'm sure they were using public awareness, posters, etc as much as possible while campaigning, so I don't understand their problem with your reporting. I can see they felt very emotional and upset, but they really need to rationally realise that they placed themselves in the public eye and that you did absolutely nothing wrong.
It's not like shooting photos of grieving relatives.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

04/02/2005 08:19:57 AM · #20

I find it curious, that as a photojournalist, you did not report all the facts straight-up in your first post. To my mind, you even mislead in stating: "really tragic event," which sounded more like personal tragedy of the kind where someone loses a loved one to death, or has one's home go up in flames (as just a couple of examples). Seems to me the ethical issue here is in honesty of reporting.

Message edited by author 2005-04-02 08:24:42.

sofap

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III

04/02/2005 08:37:11 AM · #21

crockettdl has it right. I was a photojournalist for tne Navy in the mid 70s spent time in Vietnam and shoot many things that I to this day do not look at, but at the time it was more important to show what was happining than to look away. As I am sure crockettdl knows USMC, USN, or what ever branch you are subject to more editing than in the world. After I left the Navy I remained a photojournalist and was sent back to Shuth East Asia and found that I had more freedom. But to the point, ceying over an election is not any thing to get all worked up over. So much happens in the world and so little of ti is knowen about. Photojournalist are our eyes to the world, with out then history would be repeated over and over.

deapee

Kodak V803

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

04/02/2005 08:43:31 AM · #22

oh please...they lost an election and were mad that someone took their picture? What did they think was going to happen if they lost? I thought someone had died or something from your original story.

Sounds like a bunch of cry-babies to me. Mathmetically speaking they didn't have that great a chance of winning anyway (I don't know how many people ran), but I'd say you need to find some friends who aren't babies and hang out with them instead.