|
|
Billedet du ikke måtte se
|
Jævnligt udfordrer et billede nyhedsredaktioners presseetik.
Skal vi bringe det eller ej? Månedens Mening kommer ud fra
en konkret sag rundt om en række af overvejelserne: det
uomtvisteligt gode billede, redaktionens uenighed om offentliggørelse,
hensyn til de fotograferede og betydningen af deres eget ønske.
Kommentaren »Good
photo, but readers didn't see it« er skrevet 10. november
af Mike Needs, public editor og dermed en slags Læsernes
Ombudsmand på avisen the Akron Beacon Journal i Ohio. eJour
har fået tilladelse til at gengive den.
Af Mike Needs, mneeds@thebeaconjournal.com,
ombudsmand på Beacon Journal
Grief and horror etched in her face, a woman watches as police
and fire officials attend to her neighbors. It's a bizarre blaze
of flashing lights. Amidst this chaos, her middle-aged son cradles
her in comfort.
That scene was captured in a photograph, but you didn't see
it in the Akron Beacon Journal.
Remember the story about the West Akron couple who answered
their door one recent afternoon and ended up getting stabbed?
A student from nearby Firestone High School has been charged with
the assault.
It's the kind of nightmare that people fear, especially the
elderly, who feel vulnerable and victimized. Only we don't expect
this to happen in Akron.
Reaktion stærkere end aktion
Photographer Ken Love raced to the scene and found the paramedics
taking the victims out on stretchers. There was news there, but
not a lot of emotion.
Then he turned the camera around and discovered the neighbor
and her son. Like all good photographers, Love knows that reaction
can be much more powerful than action.
He found the kind of strong emotion that can affect readers
and move a community. This is what a newspaper is all about --
reflecting life, motivating readers. That's news.
Only this photo didn't get published.
Even though they willingly gave their names, thereby indicating
permission to use the photo, the woman and her son had second
thoughts. They sent a message through the police asking -- no,
pleading -- that the photo not be used. The son explained that
his mother feared for her safety and that a photo, combined with
the angst of the attack, would be too stressful.
Could the paper still have used the photo, even without permission?
Yes. Privacy protection was lost because the woman and her son
were in the public domain; they were visible from the street.
Was this the best photo of the day? No question.
Still, you didn't see it.
Uenighed
The debate was spirited and lengthy. Susan Kirkman, in charge
of the newsroom during the day, wanted to use the photo. So did
the designer of the front page, Mark Turner, and two photo editors.
They argued forcefully that the photo captured the terror of
the tragedy in ways that words could not. It showed the consequences
of violence invading a peaceful middle-class neighborhood. Turner,
the page designer, thought it would effectively draw readers into
the story.
Night managing editor Bruce Winges opposed using the photo
and was supported by David Hertz, who supervises local news coverage.
They maintained that the newspaper had a moral responsibility
to honor the request, even without a legal requirement.
A consensus not to run the photo was reached after the photo
editors gave the issue more thought. However, it wasn't an easy
decision.
Avisens pligter
It's difficult to capture emotion in newspaper photography.
Most breaking news stories happen too quickly -- they are over
by the time photographers get there.
Even when news occurs in the public arena, many people freeze
at the sight of cameras, or worse, they pose, and emotion is lost.
For these reasons, photographers enjoy shooting sporting events,
where they find the so-called thrill of victory and the agony
of defeat.
Grief photos inevitably evoke strong reactions from readers.
In August, when a Massillon police officer was killed, a photo
showed the stunned look of fellow officers at the scene. That
photo brought this reaction from Glenmont reader Jack Kindelberger:
``The photo provides a blurry, chilling summary of what happened
that night. A gruesome reminder that the people who protect us
put themselves in harm's way every time they put on the blues.''
Other readers find less value in emotion-filled photos.
In September, a reader said she was ``sickened'' by a photo
of crying classmates of a slain 14-year-old Wayne County girl
and called the paper a predator.
Does a newspaper prey on innocent bystanders to news events?
Sometimes it must seem that way.
Does a newspaper have a duty to reflect all of our world, including
the sad and the suffering? Absolutely.
Should a newspaper take advantage of a woman watching her stricken
neighbors being loaded into ambulances? Never. And I'm glad this
paper didn't.
|