Author | Thread |
|
12/06/2004 02:46:10 AM · #26 |
If I may: democracy, like this site, is messy business. Both, in the end, work very well. |
|
|
12/06/2004 02:48:52 AM · #27 |
jm, you sound like a man of common sense and ethics. Kudos to you, sir.
Your icon is male, so I hope I got that right. If not, same message, just change the gender :-) |
|
|
12/06/2004 02:48:56 AM · #28 |
If I may add one thing...
The editor of the newspaper told me that If someone gives me their name after I photograph them, I don't need anyone's permission to run the photo in the newspaper. That may seem a little hard to swallow, but that is what I was told. The paper won't often run a photo of a person without knowing their name. I have run photos where I did not include the names, but I had them, unless it was a photo of a larger group of people in the stadium or something like that...
|
|
|
12/06/2004 02:54:19 AM · #29 |
I also don't call myself a 'journalist'. I'm just a photo stringer. Since football season is now officially over for me, my work with the newspaper will be spotty. I don't write or research much for the photos I provide. I get names when needed and I write the tag lines that go with the photos I provide.
During football season, there are more games to cover than staff photographers at the local paper, so they employ me as a stringer to go get photos. The money is minimal, but I am doing it for the experience. I get $40 for an assignment that requires more than one photo and $25 for the single photo assignments. Its not worth my time when I look at it financially, but the experience is worth more than the money :)
|
|
|
12/06/2004 02:57:08 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by GeneralE: Originally posted by graphicfunk: You must keep in mind that it is the same ACLU that wants protection for enemies caught red handed in doing damage to us in this country. I am sorry, when there is a war, the enemy not being a citizen has no such rights. |
Like those hundreds of people held incommunicado at Guantanamo Bay for months, who were then released because it turned out they weren't enemies after all?
I believe you completely mischaracterize the ACLU and therefore misinterpret many of their actions. I don't like many of the things they have to defend, like the Klan marching in Skokie, Ill. many years ago, but the one thing you have to allow is that they are consistent and unhypocritical -- demanding that the Constitution apply to everyone, not just those you agree with. Being consistent to your principles, even when it leads to a result you don't particularly like ... that is the essence of freedom as envisioned by the Founding Fathers. |
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I take my medicine as I should. The founding fathers themselves are under attack because of their belief in God. A recent incident even ptohibited the reading of the Constitution because it mentions God. The point is that the rights are for the citizens and when abuses occur there are ways to address this, but no thank you, I do not need the ACLU to oversee and to overreach as they are currently doing. The enemy has no such rights.
The ACLU is Liberal body that seeks to eradicate God period. Therefore, I do not misunderstand them. Look, the Boy Scouts merely accept a higher being, period. A higher being can be had without any attachment to Religion. Their attack on them is doing nothing for me but to identify them as secular fundamentalist. They are restricting the rights of individual or groups to believe what they want to believe. I have many friends who are ACLU members and their philosophy is just a little too twisted. You can say that they are a godless organization and while some things which they have done are good the majority has been very bad. |
|
|
12/06/2004 08:09:06 AM · #31 |
"I never even shoot children nor underage without parental approval. My camera does not give me the right to shoot anything I want."
I'm following this thread with interest. Maybe I'm naive, but it never occured to me that I could be tap dancing with the devil if i take pics of kids.....! My mind is just not geared to see the real issue at hand. And again it'is the few haunting the many. Thanks Graphicfunk and everyone else for creating in me an awareness that we may live in a cesspool of immorality. A friend of mine always said.."in a world without integrity, those who has integrity are often seen as crazy/strange/not okay..."
|
|
|
12/06/2004 08:36:18 AM · #32 |
Interesting thread - it's made me ponder what the UK-equivalent rights are, so I've rummaged around and found "The Photographer and the Law" on amazon.co.uk, which looks promising, so I've ordered a copy. I'll let you know if it's worthwhile reading for UK-based photogs...
|
|
|
12/06/2004 09:07:55 AM · #33 |
what do parents expect when they let their children dress like hoochies in public? i never understood how someone who lets and/or encourages their child to participate in something blatently exploitative (ala cheerleading) could then turn around and get upset when someone else takes a picture of it.
i'm also totally baffled how the NFL can be all holier-than-thou about that MNF intro when the actress drops her towel, but lets half-naked cheerleaders dance on the sidelines and shows beer commercials with bikinis and mud wrestling, etc.
that being said, there's no expectation of privacy at a public event.
and, for the other half of this conversation, the ACLU is NOT anti-God. it's anti-my-God-is-better-than-your-God. stop and think for 10 seconds about the BILLIONS of other people who don't believe what you believe. even if they're "wrong," does that mean they don't deserve the same rights as you? THAT'S what the ACLU is protecting.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/09/2025 02:58:18 PM EDT.