One of the main ethics controversies regarding photojournalism is the displaying of violence and victims involved. This issue has stirred up very interesting conversations because most don’t know when it’s right or wrong. Many photojournalists don’t know when and where to draw the line at how much they should capture with their camera. People definitely react to images of violence or heart-breaking events because seeing it in picture form creates a lot of emotions and causes a bigger impact. These images could range from dead or wounded soldiers in war or various deadly accidents. I believe photojournalists capture these images because they know people have the biggest reactions and it stirs up the feelings that should be addressed. I also believe many photojournalists take images like this because it is associated with winning awards like the Pulitzer prize or competitions. They have to take the most uncomfortable and striking images to be recognized and even praised for it.
People can’t help that they are attracted or curious to see images of violence or horrific events. An example of this would-be rubbernecking when an accident has occurred. People, of course, feel bad about the accident but can’t keep themselves from staring or turning their head as they pass. I don’t believe people should feel bad for doing this because it’s just second nature to them now. When most people hear about tragic events, they do turn to look up images of the events so they have a visual of what happened.
An image like the ones below are very hard and traumatizing to look at, but they do tell a story. Without these images, we wouldn’t be able to know what truly happened and be prepared for stuff like this to happen. I can imagine that taking these images is not easy for the photojournalist but they capture them to evoke a certain emotion in themselves and others. In cases where people are curious and eager to see images like these, I wouldn’t call the photojournalist heartless. I believe most do have hearts and are taking these photos simply to create a discussion or evoke viewers to feel emotions that need to be talked about. They are also just trying to inform the viewers of the world we live in and accurately capture the terrifying scenes as they occur. I would rather they take a picture so I could see it for my own eyes, then for them to just say what happened in their own words.
I believe the exception to taking these images is that we shouldn’t capture soldiers in war who have died or tortured by the enemy. I believe that crosses the lines because one, the families shouldn’t see their loved ones like that, and it likely makes people not want to join the war. I understand before I said these images inform us what is going on but I feel like those are images that are alright to be left unseen. One big area in my personal ethics map is family and friends, I know I personally wouldn’t want to see images of dead loved one circulating everywhere. Circumstances like this makes it okay to just hear and be told what happens, not have to see it with my own eyes.
 |
| My Ethics Map |
Comments
Post a Comment