Tabloid sensationalism: Drowned father and daughter picture

[$tevie]

Never mind. Ombligo's edit makes my comment unnecessary.

[DeusxMac]

May I recommend the film Medium Cool as being appropriate to this topic.

Made 50 years ago, but still on-topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_Cool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6vQlm0CTzE (turn your sound down!)

[Lemon Drop]

Ombligo wrote:
On the gut level - that man and his daughter are dead, nothing can change that. But if their image begins a serious conversation or other change, then perhaps there can be a meaning to it and they are not just another number.

As for propaganda - I am tired of hearing that word tossed out whenever someone doesn't like a photo. A propaganda photo is done with the intention of putting forth a message. There is a huge divide between propaganda and news. Both may convey emotion, but only the propaganda image is used with a particular political aim in mind.

Finally profit - since when is it wrong to make a legitimate profit? Without profit, there is no way for any news organization to survive. However news and revenue should and must remain separate, and it does at most news organizations.

From your poynter link:

The AP took some heat from the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, which issued a press release criticizing the AP’s tweet of their story, which included the graphic photo, as “exploitative and dehumanizing.” NAHJ President Hugo Balta told me over the phone that by not giving their Twitter audience the choice of seeing the image, the AP seems to be using the picture to drive traffic to its story.

“Not a lot of thought was given to the impact that the image would have with the community and the audience,” Balta told me. “The Latino community is made to feel like it’s being taken advantage of.”

-30-

I didn't use the term "propaganda" and that's not what we are talking about here. As a journalist I would think you would have a keen understanding of how that would be different than poverty porn.

New organizations should not make profit on the backs of the most poor and desperate people on the planet. Neither should NGOs raise money on these images.
There are more respectful ways to photographically represent the work.

Some of the photos in the marie claire article you link are poverty porn but most of them are not. Again, every shocking photo is not "poverty porn," a lot of stuff is being added to the mix here that is really unrelated.

[Lemon Drop]

Interesting dynamic from the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, who issued a statement saying the photo was dehumanizing and exploitative. Lots of white folks explaining to them how they're wrong.

[mrbigstuff]

I grew up worshipping (in the non-spiritual sense) the photographers Don McCullin and Susan Meiselas, both of who I have heard speak over the years, and it's something that will never leave me. These are/were people who believed it was their job to cover wars (mostly among the poor and disenfranchised) that would otherwise be invisible. These are just two of the people who have done this work, there are many more.

To the point about over-saturation: I agree, but how would the withholding of this information be anything other than censorship of a sort if editors decide that it should be withheld? where would we view it "authentically" if that were the case?

[Lemon Drop]

mrbigstuff wrote:
I grew up worshipping (in the non-spiritual sense) the photographers Don McCullin and Susan Meiselas, both of who I have heard speak over the years, and it's something that will never leave me. These are/were people who believed it was their job to cover wars (mostly among the poor and disenfranchised) that would otherwise be invisible. These are just two of the people who have done this work, there are many more.

To the point about over-saturation: I agree, but how would the withholding of this information be anything other than censorship of a sort if editors decide that it should be withheld? where would we view it "authentically" if that were the case?

Editors censor every single day. There is nothing learned from this photo that
A. wasn't already known
B. could not be demonstrated in a more respectful manner

[Lemon Drop]

rjmacs wrote:
I assume you disagree with the publication of this as well:

That is not poverty porn.

[mattkime]

Lemon Drop wrote:
Editors censor every single day. There is nothing learned from this photo that
A. wasn't already known
B. could not be demonstrated in a more respectful manner

and

C. Would continue to be ignored.

[mrbigstuff]

Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]
I assume you disagree with the publication of this as well:

That is not poverty porn.
and neither is the photo we are discussing. you have really tied yourself into a knot by thinking that it is.

[Lemon Drop]

mrbigstuff wrote:

and neither is the photo we are discussing. you have really tied yourself into a knot by thinking that it is.

This is a matter of opinion. My opinion is that the tragic photo of the El Salvadoran father and daughter is exploitative.
There is no right or wrong here.