Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Kulvinder Singh Matharu, Sep 7, 2009.

  1. Came across this article about AP publishing a photo of a dying US
    marine and the controversy surrounding it. There hasn't been much
    news here in the UK about it but I expect that it's big news in the
    US.

    <http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/53173...-it-right-for-the-associated-press-to-publish>

    I'm all up for showing how things are and the press have done so on
    may occasions, but at the same time the family must be very upset. So
    I'm in two minds about this. Storm in a tea cup? Or genuine concern
    on showing dead or dying NATO/ISAF soldiers?
    --
    Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Website : www.metalvortex.com
    Contact : www.metalvortex.com/contact/

    "Brain" and "brain"! What is "brain"?!
     
    Kulvinder Singh Matharu, Sep 7, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    RichA Guest

    There was no news value in it, the media outlets, threatened by
    falling usage and viewers are desperate and will do anything to drum
    up an audience.
     
    RichA, Sep 7, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    stephe_k Guest


    I feel images like this might make just some of the "pro war" people
    realize that yes fighting wars does cost lives. Shots of soldiers lined
    up in a parade might be more pleasant but isn't reality.

    Stephanie
     
    stephe_k, Sep 8, 2009
    #3
  4. This is the first I heard about it. During the 60's and 70's is was
    perfectly common practice to show all the atrocities of war. But the
    right-wing scum are too afraid of showing anyone the truth these days. It's
    how they're able to perpetuate their stupidity and insanity, by not making
    it clear to the world. They're too insecure and afraid to show their true
    face and all they have "accomplished" to the world.
    So ... let me get this straight .... It's okay to photograph them killing
    someone and publishing it without asking, but not okay to photograph them
    being killed and publishing it without asking. Have I got that correct now?
     
    Clancy Clarity, Sep 8, 2009
    #4
  5. Most certainly. I'd love nothing better than to show them and give them
    proof of what happens when you unknowingly become nothing but a
    corporate-pawn under the guise of "protecting freedom".
     
    Reality Bytes, Sep 8, 2009
    #5
  6. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Ray Fischer Guest

    And after all, telling the taxpayers how their money is being spent
    cannot have any relevance. When neocons and rightards want to kill
    people there can be no criticism tolerated.
     
    Ray Fischer, Sep 8, 2009
    #6
  7. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Ray Fischer Guest

    That's a rightard lie. It was Bush and the neocons who started the war.
    The soldier was there on the taxpayer's dime. The taxpayers have the
    right to know how their money is being spent.
     
    Ray Fischer, Sep 8, 2009
    #7
  8. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Ray Fischer Guest

    There is nothing decent about war. What you want is to hide
    the cost of the war that you want fought.
     
    Ray Fischer, Sep 8, 2009
    #8
  9. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    ^Tems^ Guest

    So why the big deal all of the sudden about a war photo?

    Why is any different to old black and white photos of soldiers torn
    apart on the battle field of WW1 or the Aussie soldier blindfolded on
    his knees with a japanese soldier raising the sword above his head to
    decapitate him or images of Jews being executed in front of mass grave
    pits or that Viet cong dude being shot in the head.

    What about websites like rotten.com or ogrish showing photos of car
    accidents or murders, sometime in the futre the families of these
    victims may come across them.

    We are now in the communication age thanks to the internet, the only way
    to stop images like this being published is to ban cameras.

    Humans have a morbid curiosity for images like this.
     
    ^Tems^, Sep 8, 2009
    #9
  10. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Apteryx Guest

    So clearly not yet then

    Apteryx
     
    Apteryx, Sep 8, 2009
    #10
  11. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    stephe_k Guest

    Of course I would. Since when is dying for your country something to
    hide or be ashamed of?

    Stephanie
     
    stephe_k, Sep 8, 2009
    #11
  12. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    stephe_k Guest

    Well they did show those from Iraq, the burned guys hanging. Was that
    the left wing too?

    Stephanie
     
    stephe_k, Sep 8, 2009
    #12
  13. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    Twibil Guest

    Not that I've died for my country yet, but as an ex infantryman thanx
    for that anyway.

    The wrenching photographs that have come out of wars ever since the
    camera became portable enough to make them possible have let the
    public see what war is really about, and right up until the end of
    Viet Nam such photo-journalism was simply considered to be an
    important -if risky for the photographer- part of history. (See Ken
    Burns' Civil War documentary for a striking example.)

    Then after Viet Nam the US military decided that it would be better if
    the US public was not allowed to see such photos, as it might
    prejudice them against supporting a future war -as the military felt
    had happened in Viet Nam.

    Ever since then, the military -and the rest of the US government as
    well- have frequently tried to make it difficult to take such photos,
    or to allow them to be seen by the public if they *are* taken.

    Call it "editing history in advance", and you won't be too far wrong.

    ~Pete
     
    Twibil, Sep 8, 2009
    #13
  14. Son, I bet you never served or saw war face to face. If you had, you
    would like it so much.




    In <h84dfl$225$>, on 09/07/2009
    at 08:53 PM, Doug McDonald <> said:
     
    Igetrightwingersangry, Sep 8, 2009
    #14
  15. Community Organizer, Sep 8, 2009
    #15
  16. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    J. Clarke Guest

    Nobody likes it, but propaganda intended to promote "bring our boys home
    regardless of the cost" agenda isn't serving anybody but those Iraqis who
    want to be the next Saddam.
     
    J. Clarke, Sep 8, 2009
    #16
  17. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    J. Clarke Guest

    It's only "wasted" if that Marine's life was spent to no purpose, and if the
    US pulls out before there is a stable government in place that is strong
    enough to keep the lid on then that Marine's life _will_ have been wasted.

    That's the real tragedy of Vietnam, that so many lives were spent delaying a
    result that would have just happened 10 years sooner if there were no US
    involvement.
     
    J. Clarke, Sep 8, 2009
    #17
  18. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    ^Tems^ Guest

    You must really care for your buddys if they are dying in front of you
    and you and you are more concerned about someone with a camera 50 feet
    away over trying to save their lives.
     
    ^Tems^, Sep 8, 2009
    #18
  19. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    J. Clarke Guest

    Remember all the coverage Hanoi Jane got? How about all the coverage of
    antiwar rallys? How about the daily body count? Sorry, but the US press
    was played expertly by the North Vietnamese.
     
    J. Clarke, Sep 8, 2009
    #19
  20. Kulvinder Singh Matharu

    frank Guest

    It was played expertly by the military with their Five O Clock Follies
    for a long time too, until the press finally stood up and showed what
    a farce the whole thing was. Politically and militarily it was nothing
    but a way to get your ticket punched.

    The sad thing about Iraq is we don't know how much we're turning into
    the Waffen SS as far as how we treat the civilians. Which creates more
    terrorists.

    You think the Arabs don't show worse images of how the US kills their
    civilians.? The average American couldn't stomach what shows on their
    TV channels.

    Go find some good history books on war reporting, there were worse
    images in Vietnam and WWII published.

    Its all about spin. Gates was doing a lot of that under Bush.
     
    frank, Sep 8, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.