When a news photographer witnesses a tragedy in the making, is his obligation to intervene or to document it?
That question has cropped up anew following the New York Post’s publication, on its front page, of a photo taken moments after a man was pushed onto subway tracks, and moments before he was
hit and killed by an oncoming train.
(
Read more... )
That headline is fucking horrible, New York Times, smdh at you, gd.
Reply
Reply
Reply
The Post has always been the newspaper of choice for voyeurs, gossipmongers, and screeching hardasses. Decent people don't read The Post.
Reply
That said, ngl, I tend to side-eye in general when a person's first instinct upon witnessing a tragedy is to whip out their camera. And then to sell/give it to the Post? I get that he's a photojournalist, so it's probably what he's used to doing whether it's a tragic situation or not. (I do think his explanation afterwards kinda sounds like bullshit.)
I'm more mad at the NYP though tbh. Don't hate the New York Times, they didn't do anything!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
For the record, I don't blame the photographer for not trying to assist the man. I probably would have frozen like a deer in headlights myself. I'm just not inclined to believe what he's saying about how he only took the pictures accidentally.
Reply
Reply
...and typing that out makes me realize just how paranoid and ridiculous that sounds.
Reply
Nightmare fuel to think of it.
Reply
Leave a comment