Friday, December 10, 2010

Ethics and Photojournalism

Chapter Four
Victims of Violence

by
Paul Martin Lester
From
Photojournalism An Ethical Approach
(c) 1999
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


Violence and tragedy are staples of American journalism because readers are attracted to gruesome stories and photographs. "If it bleeds, it leads" is an undesirable rule of thumb. Judges of contests also have a fatal attraction. Pulitzer Prizes are most often awarded to photographers who make pictures of gruesome, dramatic moments (Goodwin, 1983).Milwaukee Journal editor Sig Gissler summed up the newspaper profession's sometimes Hedonistic philosophy when he admitted, "We have a commercial interest in catastrophe" ("Knocking on death's door," 1989, p. 49).

Ethical problems arise for photographers and editors because readers are also repulsed by such events. It is as if readers want to know that tragic circumstances take place, but do not want to face the uncomfortable details.

After the publication of a controversial picture that shows, for example, either dead or grieving victims of violence, readers in telephone calls and in letters to the editor, often attack the photographer as being tasteless and adding to the anguish of those involved. As one writer noted, "The American public has a morbid fascination with violence and tragedy, yet this same public accuses journalists of being insensitive and cynical and of exploiting victims of tragedy" (Brown, 1987, p. 80).

The Immediate Impact of Images
Photographs have long been known to spark more emotional responses than stories. Eugene Goodwin (1983) in his book, Groping for Ethics agreed. Goodwin wrote, "Pictures usually have more impact on people than written words. Their capacity to shock exceeds that of language" (p. 190). Other researchers have noted the eye catching ability of newspaper photographs. Miller (1975) wrote, "Photos are among the first news items to catch the reader's eye. . . . A photo may catch the eye of a reader who doesn't read an accompanying story" (p. 72). Blackwood (1983) argued that "People who either can't read, or who don't take the time to read many of the stories in newspapers do scan the photographs . . . " (p. 711). Nora Ephron (1978) asserted that disturbing accident images should be printed. "That they disturb readers," Ephron wrote, "is exactly as it should be: that's why photojournalism is often more powerful than written journalism" (p. 62).

When U.S. servicemen were killed in Iran during the 1980 attempt to rescue American hostages, gruesome images of the char-red bodies were transmitted to American newspapers. Ombudsman George Beveridge of the defunct Washington Star defended his paper's publication of the photographs by writing, "newspapers were obliged to print them because they gave readers a dimension of understanding of the situation and the people involved that written words could not possibly convey" (cited in Gordon, 1980, p. 25). For Beveridge, if photographs accurately and dramatically document a news event, even though their content may be gruesome, those pictures should be printed. Beveridge is probably using the Categorical Imperative philosophy. Nevertheless, newspapers received hundreds of calls and letters protesting the use of the images. A Mississippi newspaper editor tore the pictures up when he saw them because he explained it would have been "the poorest kind of taste to display those ghastly pictures" (p. 28). The editor was most likely guided by the Golden Rule philosophy.

-for full article visit website

http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/lester/writings/pjethics.html

Photographic Coverage during the Persian Gulf and Iraqi Wars

C. King &, P. M. Lester. (Autumn 2005). Photographic Coverage during the Persian Gulf and Iraqi Wars in Three U.S. Newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. Vol. 82, No. 3, pp. 623-637.


Cynthia King
Paul Martin Lester
Professors of Communications,
California State University, Fullerton




The Wars with Iraq, 1991 and 2003 offer researchers a unique opportunity to study differences in the visual coverage between media pools and embedded journalists. While the media pool system used in 1991 was criticized for restricting journalists and their stories too severely, the 2003 embedded journalists, although faced with restrictions as well, gave many more journalists much closer access to the fighting. Consequently, one would expect to see differences in the printed reports between the two wars.
Termed "Desert Storm" by the military and the "Persian Gulf War" by the media, the clash with Iraq over Kuwait in 1991 was an example of the often-tenuous relationship between government officials and journalists. Hundreds of journalists from news organizations throughout the world covered the front from Saudi Arabia, but only about 100 were chosen to make up the official military press pool, with less than 20 allowed to accompany military officials at any one time.

Pulitzer Prize reporter Malcolm W. Brown explained, "The war-coverage system in the Persian Gulf, worked out by the Pentagon and representatives of major American news organizations last summer, has antecedents that date from the brief Grenada war of 1983, which reporters were barred from covering. Their employers objected so strongly that the Pentagon convened a commission headed by Maj. Gen. Winant Sidle, retired chief of Army information, and made up mainly of military and Government public-affairs officials. It recommended that future wars be covered by pools of news representatives-selected, controlled and censored by the military."

- see full essay on website

http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/lester/writings/iraq_war.html

Military Censorship of Photographs


Originally published in Media Ethics Issues and Cases, second edition edited by Philip Patterson and Lee Wilkins, Madison, WI: WCB Brown & Benchmark, 1994, pp. 212-215.

Paul Martin Lester,  California State University, Fullerton

The United States has been engaged in military conflicts both honorable and questionable. Inspired by the need to report each war to an anxious public, journalists have traveled to the front lines to produce stories and pictures both supportive and critical. As the informational and emotional power of visual images has become more understood, military strategists and politicians have instituted various forms of censorship of images in an attempt to protect their troops and to control public opinion.

Termed "Desert Storm" by the military and the "Gulf War" by the media, the clash with Iraq over Kuwait was an example of the often tenuous relationship between government officials and journalists. Hundreds of journalists throughout the world were in Saudi Arabia covering the fight, but only about 100 made up the official military press pool. With more than 500,000 American troops in the area and fighting erupting on several fronts, newspapers, for example, relied on only 16 journalists to cover every ground unit in the country. Although most reporters accepted the fact that a pool was necessary, many were frustrated by the military's slowness in transporting the pool members to troubled areas. Once there, pool members were accompanied by an ever-present military escort.

Department of Defense ground rules signed by all journalists prohibited reporting that would in any way endanger the troops. A journalist had to get approval before attempting any story. Once the piece was completed, the story and pictures were subject to U.S. and allied military censorship. Although there was no stated prohibition against showing wounded or killed soldiers, some journalists were wondering halfway into the war why they had not "seen one picture of bloodshed (or) anyone who's dead yet." Charges of "news management" and a "credibility gap" between official and pool reporter accounts surfaced. Claiming that press pool restrictions were too harsh, nine U.S. publications and novelists asked for a federal court injunction against the Defense Department's pool procedures.

The Gulf War was difficult to cover. It was primarily an air campaign waged in the middle of the night using fast-moving aircraft carrying computer-guided missiles with video cameras in their nose cones to signal the result of their prearranged mission. The Iraqi government was extremely hostile to journalists, only allowing a handful of correspondents to report from their side of the conflict. The isolated nature of the terrain was a further barrier to full-access coverage. It was simply not possible to conveniently drive across the huge desert seeking front-line firefights as in previous wars.

Besides, it was quite dangerous to try such a mission as Bob Simon and his crew from CBS discovered. Simon and his associates decided to drive to Iraq through the desert on their own because they were frustrated by the military's strict censorship controls over their actions. They were soon captured by Iraqi forces and detained until the end of the conflict. Despite these dangers and restrictions, CNN's coverage of the night bombing of Baghdad was particularly impressive and the subsequent damage to buildings in that ancient city reported by Peter Arnett-the only American correspondent able to report with his words and images from Baghdad.

As never before, technology played a significant part in fighting and reporting the war. Arnett and others were able to report from the far-off country because of the use of a portable satellite transmitter. Photographers were able to quickly send their images to their waiting editors because of digital cameras and transmitters. Nevertheless, most still photographers and videographers were frustrated by their lack of access to any real fighting scenes. They were left to cover noncombat scenes involving soldiers drilling. Once the ground war had commenced, a few journalists found themselves riding along with the tank units. But most of the fighting occurred at night making it extremely difficult to record action scenes. Most of the pictures out of the fighting areas in Iraq were of the long lines of Iraqi prisoners captured by military forces.


One highly emotional picture that did get through military censors was taken by Detroit Free Press photographer David Turnley. Turnley was riding with the 5th MASH medical unit inside Iraq. A fierce firefight had recently erupted between Saddam Hussein's Republican Guard and the 24th Mechanized Infantry Division.


Turnley's helicopter filled with medical personnel and equipment touched down about 100 yards from a frantic scene. An American military vehicle had just taken a direct hit. Soldiers on the ground were upset as they said it had mistakenly been struck by a U.S. tank. The wounded were quickly retrieved from the vehicle and carried to the helicopter. Sgt. Ken Kozakiewicz, suffering from a fractured hand, slumped into the helicopter. The body of the driver of Kozakiewicz's vehicle was placed on the floor of the helicopter inside a zippered bag. A medical staff member, perhaps thoughtlessly, handed the dead driver's identification card to Kozakiewicz. Turnley, sitting across from the injured soldier, recorded the emotional moment with his camera when Kozakiewicz realized that his friend was killed by the blast.
Later at the hospital, Turnley asked the soldiers their names. He also asked if they would mind if the pictures were published. They all told him to get the images published.

The rules of combat enforced by the military required that Turnley give his film to military officials for approval for publication. A day after the incident, Turnley learned that his editors had not yet received his negatives from the Defense Department officials. Military officials insisted that they were holding on to the film because the images were of a sensitive nature. They also said that they were concerned about whether the dead soldier's family had been informed of his death. Because of Turnley's argument that the family must have been informed by then, the officials released his film.

His photographs were eventually published in Detroit and throughout the world. The picture of Kozakiewicz crying over the loss of his friend was called the "Picture of the War" on the cover of Parade magazine. Several months after the war, Turnley spoke to Kozakiewicz's father, who had been in one of the first American military units in Vietnam. Reacting to the censorship of images by military officials, David Kozakiewicz explained that the military was "trying to make us think this is antiseptic. But this is war. Where is the blood and the reality of what is happening over there? Finally we have a picture of what really happens in war." For David Kozakiewicz, showing his son grieving over the death of a fellow fighter gave added meaning to the soldier's death.


Micro Issues:

1. Should the photographer have taken the picture?

2. Should the photographer have asked permission of the injured soldier to take the picture?
3. Does a picture of a grieving soldier belong on page one?
4. Should photographers be allowed to travel along with military personnel to the fighting fronts?

Middle-range Issues:
1. Would criticism be lessened if the image was run small and on an inside page?

2. If the soldier is not from your newspaper's local area, why should the picture run?
3. How would you as an editor react to a reader's complaining that the picture demoralizes America's war effort?

Macro Issues:
l. What moral philosophies influence an editor who uses the picture and a reader who complains about its use?

2. Does the military during a war have the right to censor images produced by a photographer?
3. Does "pool" coverage during a war offer the best solution for informing the public back home?
4. Should an editor wait to publish a picture of a dead person until relatives are informed? Why or why not?
5. Should journalists avoid taking and publishing images that criticize the nation's war effort?

http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/lester/writings/military.html

Wikileaks- War Logs

Whitney: Nina Berman- My turn


Nina Berman’s interest in the human stories behind war and global conflicts is the inspiration and motivation behind her searing photographs of contemporary warfare. By creating portraits of individuals transformed by war, she seeks to make the conflict “more intimately felt by a civilian audience.” Join her as she brings the war home in a unique format for a night of dialogue and interaction.


http://whitney.org/WatchAndListen/PublicPrograms/MyTurnNinaBerman

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Nina Berman: Marine Wedding



Nina Berman’s photographs document the rarely explored effects and harsh realities of contemporary warfare. She engages the viewer with intimate images of the consequences of war that are often given short shrift in the popular media. 

The 2006 photographs on view in 2010 document the marriage of former Marine sergeant Ty Ziegel, then twenty-four, to his high school sweetheart, Renee Kline, twenty-one. After being severely disfigured in a suicide bomber’s attack while stationed in Iraq, Ty underwent fifty reconstructive operations. A plastic dome, with holes where his ears and nose used to be, replaced his shattered skull. Without any staging or direction, Berman took spontaneous photographs of Ty and Renee in the weeks leading up to their wedding day and accompanied them when they had their wedding portrait taken. Her picture of them at the portrait studio conveys an air of alienation between the couple, who separated a few months after their wedding. Berman photographed Ty again in 2008 and describes the later images as suggestive of “a comfortable acceptance with military culture despite the cost.”



http://www.ninaberman.com/index.php







Taxi to the Dark Side


Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room) directs this Best Documentary Oscar winner that uses interviews, news footage and firsthand reports to examine the Bush administration's policy on torture. The film focuses on the case of an Afghan taxi driver who picked up three passengers and never returned home. Instead, he wound up at dead at the Bagram Air Base, killed by injuries inflicted by U.S. soldiers.




www.taxitothedarkside.com

The Tillman Story



 In May of 2006, after being contacted by Mary Tillman, mother of pro-football star turned Army Ranger Pat Tillman, Mike and his Military Affairs Editor, Stan Goff (US Army Special Forces, retired) spent days analyzing and decoding 2000 pages of Army records. The  AP, Washington Post and L.A. Times (among others) stories which broke the Tillman case open in August and September were virtual cut and pastes of FTW’s original copyrighted series from June of 2006. Every congressional handout which forced eventual hearings was from FTW. Nine officers, including three generals, were disciplined and many believe that the sudden resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was a result of the Tillman scandal.


  
Pat Tillman was no red-necked, unthinking friend of the Neocons. Pat Tillman was a football star and a scholar. He was chillingly handsome; his oversized square jaw and Herculean physique made him look like GI Joe come to life. He had been openly criticizing the Bush Administration’s war on terror while serving as an active-duty US Army Ranger in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He knew the war was wrong, but continued to do his duty faithfully and energetically. He complained to Navy SEALs, fellow rangers, Special Forces; anyone who would listen. He was keeping a diary and he was looking forward to the day when he might return home to retake his position as a defensive safety for the Phoenix Cardinals.


Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire in what the best-case indicates was a surreal blend of bad judgment, homicidal madness, panic, grotesque mismanagement, lies, and a cover up that is proving to have so many layers that FTW has decided to make this case a major, long-term investigative project. In part that is because we have already uncovered crimes, falsification of records, lies and—as Stan Goff will show you—disingenuousness of cosmic proportions. “Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining,” Stan will tell you is an old saying. It seems like everyone’s been pissed on here—especially the American people.



http://www.fromthewilderness.com/the_tillman_files.shtml


 

Collapse



From the acclaimed director of American Movie, this portrait of radical thinker Michael Ruppert explores his apocalyptic vision of the future, spanning the crises in economics, energy, environment and more.

Censoring Iraq: The Weekly Standard

Censoring Iraq:
Why are there so few reporters with American troops in combat? Don't blame the media.

In a counterinsurgency, the media battlespace is critical. When it comes to mustering public opinion, rallying support, and forcing opponents to shift tactics and timetables to better suit the home team, our terrorist enemies are destroying us. Al Qaeda's media arm is called al Sahab: the cloud. It feels more like a hurricane. While our enemies have "journalists" crawling all over battlefields to chronicle their successes and our failures, we have an "embed" media system that is so ineptly managed that earlier this fall there were only 9 reporters embedded with 150,000 American troops in Iraq. There were about 770 during the initial invasion.

Many blame the media for the estrangement, but part of the blame rests squarely on the chip-laden shoulders of key military officers and on the often clueless Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad, which doesn't manage the media so much as manhandle them. Most military public affairs officers are professionals dedicated to their jobs, but it takes only a few well-placed incompetents to cripple our ability to match and trump al Sahab. By enabling incompetence, the Pentagon has allowed the problem to fester to the point of censorship.

- see website for full article

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/844nigml.asp

Collateral Murder: WikiLeaks



 Collateral Murder


Update: On July 6, 2010, Private Bradley Manning, a 22 year old intelligence analyst with the United States Army in Baghdad, was charged with disclosing this video (after allegedly speaking to an unfaithful journalist). The whistleblower behind the Pentagon Papers, Daniel Ellsberg, has called Mr. Manning a 'hero'. He is currently imprisoned in Kuwait. The Apache crew and those behind the cover up depicted in the video have yet to be charged. To assist Private Manning, please see bradleymanning.org.

5th April 2010 10:44 EST WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff.

Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-sight, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded. The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.

After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own "Rules of Engagement". Consequently, WikiLeaks has released the classified Rules of Engagement for 2006, 2007 and 2008, revealing these rules before, during, and after the killings.

WikiLeaks has released both the original 38 minutes video and a shorter version with an initial analysis. Subtitles have been added to both versions from the radio transmissions.

WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.

WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work.

http://www.collateralmurder.com/

Restrepo










Sebastian Junger and Tim Hetherington's year dug in with the Second Platoon in one of Afghanistan's most strategically crucial valleys reveals extraordinary insight into the surreal combination of back breaking labor, deadly firefights, and camaraderie as the soldiers painfully push back the Taliban. Written by Sundance Film Festival  

Andrew Traub- Collage Work









Iraq War Images













We at Empire Burlesque are showing the painful images in order
to unveil the nature of war and it's real impact on human lives.
The war that the mainstream media will not show.
The war that the governments of the world who support
the brutal occupation of Iraq would rather you not see.
This collection over 600 images is intended to provide a window...
a montage of the human toll of war. George Bush wanted to eliminate journalists
by bombing al Jazeera headquarters in Qatar in an act against the freedom
of expression. Governments keep war hidden because it is hideous.
To allow people to see this reality -- the shattered bodies, the wounded children, the incomprehensible mayhem is to risk eroding popular support for it.
This is particularly true with wars that have less than overwhelming popular
support to begin with. In the case of Vietnam, battlefield images played
an important role in turning the tide of public opinion.
And in Iraq, a war whose official justification has turned out to be false,
and which a majority of the American people now believe to have been a mistake,
the administration would prefer that these grim images never be seen. 

http://www.chris-floyd.com/war/index1.htm