Controversial use of images
There’s an interesting article here (
) on a set of images that came out of the Occupy movement and also the different ways in which they were used. (One a lot more so than the other).
I’ve seen a couple of instances like this now, where the editors get picky over the type of images they want to use in order to skew their message politically or just mask the truth of a situation. I don’t really think there can be anything done about it (except a loud collective call for responsible editing of articles and selection of images).
Most of the time the first group to suffer blame for this would be the photographers, for they are perceived to have been guilty of ‘one-sided reporting’. In this case however, it’s that the editors are to blame. They wield a lot of power and are the pseudo finish-line for any form of reporting. There was another video that was released earlier about how photographers overdramatise situations in order to make great images. Well, editors don’t want images of nothing happening (a.k.a the truth).
The real message here is that the responsibility of newsmaking belongs to both the photographers and the editors and it’s not fair to blame them alone. Aside from this as consumers we’re also responsible to do our own cross checking of facts and assertions. In this day and age it’s easy to find other sources, it’s a google away. So be careful the next time you take an article or image in the papers at face value, many a time it is a lot more than that.