After reading the rest of the class blogs it seems I am in the minority, as I would absolutely not post the photo of Joshua Bernard’s mangled body. Ben Macintyre from The Times eloquently captured my sentiments when he said that this “photograph violates one of the oldest taboos, by intruding into the sacred privacy associated with the moment of death”. I think entertainment and journalism is heading the wrong direction if we have the right to capture or steal that moment from somebody in the name of truth. Dying is personal.
That is not to say that Joshua Bernard’s story should not be told because as many of the class have already commented it gives a personal and compelling view to an otherwise impersonal war. However, the story can be told without the gore. In the summer school pro seminar we looked at Jim Sheeler’s slide show and articles titled Fallen Heroes. http://www.rockymountainnews.com/special-reports/final-salute/ and this was much more emotional and compelling than the bloodied images of Joshua Bernard.
A number of the class blogs argued that the photo was necessary because journalists need to tell the truth. Why is it that the American media feels it’s important to show images of war to be truthful but it’s absolutely taboo to show naked people? Is it selective truthfulness?
Heightened emotional states (fear, panic, jubilation, anger) always make compelling photos, but does that mean we have equal rights to see all in the name of truth?
As I watched the class video and this scenario was put through the Poytner ethics tests I wondered if there are any limits to what we are likely to see in the future. Will we be watching real time executions slide shows all in the pursuit of truth?
The Associated Press should have respected the family’s wishes not to print the picture.
href="<$BlogItemURL$>"><$BlogItemTitle$>
2 comments:
Hi Jennifer,
Even though as you may be in the minority, you pose a very interesting side of this argument. Yes, death is personal, but I'd just like to say that in war, it's not - death is not hidden nor is it private. In war, death is a moment that is shared by the person behind the weapon, the person in front of it and everyone else who happens to find themselves surrounded by war -despite their role as soldier, insurgent, civilian, or journalist. Lance Corporal Bernard signed on to be a Marine during a time of war and with that a very public death is a hazard of the job, especially when the objective of a Taliban Insurgent is to kill foreign soldiers.
Also I want to point out that Lance Corporal Bernard was alive during that moment captured by Jacobson and only died of a blood clot later. There were no photographs of Bernard's final moments as he fought for his life with a medic(s) over him - if there were, they weren't published.
I find it interesting that within Julie Jacobson's slide show, there was only one image that showed any explicit injury - in fact it was the only photo within the whole set broached that kind of imagery -implicitly or explicitly.
I would argue that the compelling nature of both the "Final Salute" and the "Fallen Marine" slideshows aren't comparable, they tell different stories - even if a reader grasps a similar message between them. But these opinions are more personal preference rather that ethical.
Although related in the vein of what is ok to publish and what isn't - the questions you pose at the end of your post seem like a more over arching dilemma that is faced by journalistic & other media outlets and is great fuel for a big discussion.
Thank you for posting your opinion, even if you are in the minority. Diversity always makes life interesting!
I have never found it so difficult for myself to come to a decision on where I stand on a certain issue, but with this topic I am completely torn. My problem is that I find myself agreeing with both sides, and cannot seem to determine whose side I am standing on in the end, but I think I may be joining the minority.
I understand that war is not private. Soldiers signed on to fight for our rights, and a compelling story such as this should be made public. However, I can't help but think that it if was my child, would I really want what may be his last living photograph publicized.
I would have to say that in my opinion, I feel that the story could have been run without the photo. I would rather see a photo of him in life than in death.
I also struggled with the fact that he was alive during the photo, and whether or not it is his death that I am struggling with. I have discovered that whether he lived or not, the fact that the picture illustrates a soldier critically wounded is to much in my taste. I feel that I have a strong mental image of the implications of war without seeing someones tragedy captured in a photo.
Post a Comment