Posted on 02/07/2004 11:20:13 PM PST by atomic conspiracy
Photographers take pictures of a Palestinian woman as she cries next to the 8-meter-tall wall part of the barrier Israel is building to separate the outskirts of Jerusalem from the West Bank in the village of Abu Dis Saturday Feb. 7, 2004. Around a thousand Israeli and Palestinians rallied against the controversial security barrier that is meant, according to Israel, to keep suicide bombers out. Others condemn the barrier, which dips deep into the West Bank in some areas, as a land grab. (AP Photo/Enric Marti)
"And the Oscar in the category of Best supporting actress in an internationally stoked conflict goes to..."
The boy on the right blows all of the drama of the scene with his obvious smile.
I saw that as the key right away.
ML/NJDear HonestReporting Subscriber,
On Feb. 7, while photojournalists were recording a seemingly candid expression of Palestinian suffering, Enric Marti of the Associated Press shot the scene from another angle, including the pack of photographers in his frame:
This is a very telling image, both regarding the news item in question and the larger issue of media coverage of this conflict.
While it's possible that this woman began weeping before she encountered the photographers, her position ― alone, alongside English graffiti ― suggests the scene was staged for maximum emotional impact to a Western audience. It seems these photographers are not merely 'capturing the scene', but rather creating it ― either actively (by asking her to pose) or passively (allowing themselves to be manipulated by her, posing for their cameras).
Either scenario misleads the news consumer and is therefore a violation of photojournalistic ethics. The New York Times, for example, sets this standard for the integrity of news photos:
Images in our pages that purport to depict reality must be genuine in every way... Pictures of news situations must not be posed.
Moreover, these journalists are eagerly pursuing this shot because the image available here ― Palestinian suffering at the hands of Israelis ― has become the central storyline of this conflict for most media outlets. Real or manufactured, that image appears all too often with utter lack of context, as we see here.
Palestinian suffering is then said to create 'desperation', which many media outlets use to explain (or even justify) horrific Palestinian terrorism. Arnold Roth, whose teenage daughter was killed by a Palestinian terrorist at the Sbarro's pizzeria in Jerusalem, warns against passive acceptance of this media message:
Everything I have learned about Palestinian terrorists since my daughter Malki was murdered tells me that desperation is the last word you should apply to them. These people are jubilant, triumphal, ecstatic at the moment of performing their satanic act of mass murder. The next time you hear about their 'desperation', think about this image of an Arab woman crying on demand for the gathered paparazzi. We and all our neighbors are being manipulated by photo editors, journalists and reporters in the field.
Did the picture from one of the photojournalists shown here (or a similar photo capturing 'spontaneous' Palestinian suffering) appear recently in your local paper? If so, forward this photo to the editor, with a note expressing concern that some of the techniques used to cover this conflict don't meet standards of journalistic integrity.
Part of the problem is the increasingly intimate relationship between news and entertainment in the modern saturation media, and the almost complete demise of the distinction between these once separate fields of endeavour. This is inherent in the modern technological media themselves.
One hundred years ago, the notion of lumping actors and journalists together would have seemed at least bizarre and probably incomprehensible. Today, it is a simple recognition of reality. This means that the traditional values of journalism; objectivity (not "neutrality"), skepticism, and truthfullness; have been replaced by the values of the theater, the circus, and the gladiatorial arena. Before the twentieth century, actors and circus performers were consigned to the same social level as prostitutes while journalism was revered as a noble calling. Today, journalists have become entertainers and circus performers, sometimes clowns, and their ethics reflect these roots.
Part of this has to do with the very size and influence of the modern media. There are hundreds of candidates for every job opening in big media, and the rewards; in prestige, money, and power; are enormous. Only the most talented or the most ruthless have any chance of success in this brutally competitive industry. Is it any wonder, then, that the journalistic ranks are often filled with sociopaths who would do literally anything for career advancement?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
