New York Post's Subway Death Photo: Was It Ethical Photojournalism?

[imnotasquirrel]

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.

Comments

[art_house_queen]

He was pushed? Can someone fill me in on the whole story? I really don't want to go to the source.

[kseda]

Don't. I did and wish I had backed off that impulse click.

From what I gathered from local media, there was an argument on a platform (caught on film also, according to the local news) and one man pushed another into the path of an oncoming train. I haven't looked into it more so if someone has more details that'd be helpful.

[art_house_queen]

Thank you for the information. Also, wow. D:

[nutmegdealer]

he was arguing with some guy who'd been harrassing other people on the platform and was pushed.

[kaelstra]

It's a horrifying picture, but pictures can be deceptive; after all, we don't know how far away the cameraman was when he took the pictures. He could have been very far away.

That headline is fucking horrible, New York Times, smdh at you, gd.

[trivalent]

Just, redirect the hate at New York Post, owned by a good friend Murdoch. NYT has its own issues, but this ain't one of them.

[kaelstra]

Woops, my bad! I got them mixed up! D:

[cinnamontoast]

The Post was hateful and awful long before Murdoch. I had two friends murdered in the '80s. The headlines in the Post were lurid and frothing. The story described my friends and their murders in ways that highlighted innocuous details which made the murder seem conspiratorial, when in reality, it was nothing more than an interrupted robbery. It was horrible enough without The Post. They pile misery upon misery and always have.

The Post has always been the newspaper of choice for voyeurs, gossipmongers, and screeching hardasses. Decent people don't read The Post.

[thesilverymoon]

Honestly, I can't fault the photographer for not rushing forward to help. Having been in that position before, it all happens very quickly--it's hard to think that fast about what to do when you're terrified.

And while I don't necessarily have a huge issue with the Post running the picture (it rubs me wrong of course, but idk--maybe I'm just too tempted to give shitty newspapers leeway when it comes to taste), I have an issue with them making it the front page picture.

It reminds me of when my grandmother met my brother's girlfriend's family. Her brother used to be an editor at the Post, while her dad is a columnist at the Times. Upon hearing the brother worked at the post, she turns to the dad and goes "I am so, so sorry."

[thesilverymoon]

Also I have to say, out of everyone involved in this I feel the worst for the conductor. Killing someone, but through no fault of your own, must be an awful, awful experience. I hope he gets plenty of time off and has access to an excellent therapist.

[kseda]

This is where I get so randomly pissed when news stories describe something like "a train hit a person/a car", because - made up statistic here - nine times out of ten it is not the train engineer's fault. I ride New Jersey Transit every day and unfortunately know how common those things are (the delays from such incidents are, horrifically, described as resulting from trespassing) and have no idea what sort of support structure is in place for these engineers and conductors.

[maclou]

I thought of the driver too. I known someone who drives a subway train and one time someone fell in front of the train and died and he got very deeply depressed over it. It was a long, long time before he could return to work :/

[lovedforaday]

If the picture was published the inside of the paper with a lot of warning, maybe that would have been sort of ok. But on the front page with the Post's annoying font flashing DOOMED, that was definitely an asshole move. If they had any shame, they should be embarrassed and sorry for this.

As for the photographer. Perhaps he should have kept the pic to himself. I don't know, it's all very upsetting.

[imnotasquirrel]

It's the Post, they have no shame.

I remember when they got criticism for running the picture of a student jumping from the building, the editor said something like, "We're a tabloid rag, what do you expect?"

[squeeful]

I am side-eying the idea that the photographer was obligated to help, but no one is berating the other bystanders for the same.

[lil_insanity]

Agreed. In an emergency, I don't think any one person* is more or less obligated to help than another person.

*excluding people trained for that kind of thing- EMTs, police officers, etc, obviously they're obligated to do what they can

[lady_borg]

MTE

[kaelstra]

I think it's the instinct to blame the most visible person. 'The cameraman was obviously "there", so why didn't he help?' sort of thing. I don't agree with it, hell, the cameraman may have been really far down the walkway when he got the picture. Pictures can be deceptive; they can be zoomed in really close, and make it look like the camera was mere feet away, instead of several yards, for example.