Read both sides and weigh in here. Who do you agree with, and why? Should the photographer have a say in how his photo is used, whether it is used or abused? Are there broader implications beyond just this one photo as Kennerly suggests?
NB C-notes
-
From the WaPo:
NEW YORK -- The Society of Professional Journalists condemned NBC News for
practicing "checkbook journalism" by chartering a jet that carrie...
14 years ago
8 comments:
What started as photograph of a friendly family gathering became unethical and sinister usage of the photo by Newsweek. When a photographer is granted the privilege of entering someone's home and documenting a private family event a certain responsibility accompanies the invitation.Newsweek violated the privilege extended to Hume by cropping the photo and twisting it's meaning with text. The Newsweek editors should be embarrassed.
First, it's a really poor crop job, with a half an ass protruding from the left center of a full-bleed layout. That turned a merely okay photo into a bad photo.
That alone likely should have angered Kennerly, because his work is his name.
But, beyond the ham-handed technique, I imagine Newsweek had a contractual right to use the shot in any manner it chose - Kennerly sold it, NW bought it from Getty... that's the curse of the freelancer.
Still, as it regards this photo, Newsweek was hugely dishonest. It completely altered the context in which the reader views Cheney.
Even if the altered message was supposed to be "look at the heart patient eating a slab of Omerga3-rich smoked salmon" there is little difference in this crop job than (hypothetically) had a Newsweek copy editor replaced the word lesbian with dyke when describing Cheney's daughter Mary or her partner Heather.
Also, besides Kennerly's animus, what did Newsweek gain. My guess is that the layout called for a vertical instead of a horizontal. The work landed in the lap of a lazy editor, or one on deadline.
On the other hand, this image doesn't make me think Cheney is any less of a criminally insane megalomaniacal Fascist. As I am sure it doesn't evoke additional gooey feeling in those who consider him a genuine hero.
In the end, this a work story... everyone has them... it's just that or work is journalism.
My first reaction was not that this was an ominous scene of a butcher - just an odd choice for a magazine spread, perhaps not a good photograph in the first place. I don't think that the degree of maliciousness in war criminals is indicated by the amount of time they sit around chopping meat. This is part of why I was puzzled by Newsweek's response. Maybe they were trying to make a point, but it a weak one, if it worked at all. It seems almost like an attack on Kennerly for challenging their use of the photo as unethical (so they chose to take an aggressive defense) rather than that being such a specific, purposeful goal originally.
If Kennerly is so concerned about the point of view that the magazine was attempting to portray by cropping the photo, it's worth thinking about what he was trying to portray in this photo. Was the purpose to portray Cheney as a family man, father and grandfather? Would he not be manipulating the medium in the same way to perpetuate his point of view? I also wonder if there were any close ups just of Cheney cutting eat (salmon, it seems, not a bloody butcher board.) Would he be offended if they used that photo only instead of the wide family shot?
It is a hazard of the profession if you sell your work to be used as a freelancer. It is also interesting how he seems to hold photojournalists as more ethical than the media in general. But photographs can be used to portray a point of view as well.
Despite a goal of objectivity, almost all stories are going to have a spin, particularly those that are political in nature.
I have only one question: Did Kennerly know what story he was taking photos for? If so, then this photo--cropped even---is fair game. Moreover, as a seasoned photographer, Kennerly should be well aware that editorial decisions like these happen ALL of the time in journalism. Photos are not exempt. When did cropping photos to fit a spread become unethical, sometimes it has to be done simply to fit in a given space. Furthermore, I think Kennerly over-reacted. "Is Cheney a Butcher?" is simply a sarcastic play on words for Newsweek's audience (many of whom --I would be willing to bet are not Cheney fans and have likely associated him with evil anyway).
Perhaps the caption and the picture were not in the best taste but then neither are alot of other things that pop up in the news. Journalism, these days, has to be taken with a grain of salt. Kennerly should know that and just let it roll off his back. In the future, if he wants to prevent it, he should ask more questions about the story idea, photos wanted, and then voice his concerns over ethical issues such as these, as he sees them.
I do agree that Newsweek cropped this picture in a way to help in the characterization of their subject.I believe this a fair and common practice in journalism. The fact that the photographer ,felt betrayed and that the validity of his work was compromised is certainly understandable.
But,if he agrees to sell his photos without the ability to, approve the final publication ,and assumably not know the subject of the story, he was taking these photos for, he doesn't have any right to claim injustice and say his work was unethically tampered with .
I don't think in this case Newsweek had an obligation to consult kennerly on the way the photo was published. Yes, Newsweek used the cropped photo to manipulate the image of their subject to their readers,in a political statement,but that is certainly not new!Kennerly is a pro how can he be suprised!
I feel it was an inappropriate manipulation of the photo.I think the photographer is justified in being upset.
Strip away the discussion about butchery, evil and sin and David Hume Kennerly raises a serious issue. Should the role of journalists be about gathering facts and presenting the truth objectively or can it be about biased opinions? And if opinions and editorials are okay how does the photographer preserve their professional integrity within this landscape? How can they be sure their work is either linked to reputable fact based reporting or if, heaven forbid, it is linked with editorial that editorial matches the photographer’s opinions. How can they control how the reader interprets their work?
Hume Kennerly seems disappointed with the increasing use of editorial, opinion and tabloid style sensationalism in journalism. This is a timely discussion as one gets the sense that traditional journalism is under pressure to entertain rather than just present cold facts. Many national newspapers include notoriously biased columnists (e.g. Maureen Dowd in New York Times) and there is a blur between newspaper blog and print worlds. Opinion is everywhere and everybody has an opinion, or so it seems to me.
If editorial and more bias is likely to increase, Hume raises a second important issue for his colleagues. How do they protect their reputations especially if they are freelance and selling their pictures independent of story? How do they preserve the integrity of their subjects and ensure their reputation is not linked to the editorial team? I guess Hume Kennerly thought he was pretty safe selling his work to Newsweek given he was the former contributing editor. He was proved wrong and maybe wants to serve this as a warning to colleagues and also preserve his relationship with Cheney et al.
To put Hume’s outrage into context, it would be like a journalist writing a well argued fact based piece and having the editor change into a highly slanted opinion piece without consulting the journalist.
What I sense in Hume Kennerly’s arguments is just his frustration at his lack of control. In the past a photographer takes a picture and controls what’s in the image. He controls how objective the picture is. Does it reflect the scene or the person or is it just aesthetically pleasing and reflect the photographer’s own personal bias?. Now they have lost some of that control as the editors decide what is in the image and how the reader should interpret it.
Hume Kennerly has ignited a healthy debate. Who has control, and how do photographers preserve their integrity in this world of opinions.
Post a Comment