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

Doug McDonald wrote:
RichA wrote:

Kulvinder Singh Matharu wrote:
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.



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.

The picture itself is no news. The scum left-wing media use these
to try to make people feel sick and therefore want to lose a war.
Its standard stuff and long since the whole affair is well known.

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

Doug McDonald wrote:
DG wrote:
If people are upset about the photo then they should blame the
politicians for the war, not the photographer for the image.

NO! They should blame the scum people who print it against
the family's wishes, and the people who
started the war: al Qaeda and the Taliban.

That's a rightard lie. It was Bush and the neocons who started the war.

There is nothing
wrong with the photographer taking it ... if the family
had agreed, publishing it would have been OK.

The soldier was there on the taxpayer's dime. The taxpayers have the
right to know how their money is being spent.

--
Ray Fischer

Doug McDonald wrote:
Annika1980 wrote:
On Sep 7, 8:10 pm, Doug McDonald wrote:
NO! They should blame the scum people who print it against
the family's wishes, and the people who
started the war: al Qaeda and the Taliban. There is nothing
wrong with the photographer taking it ... if the family
had agreed, publishing it would have been OK.


Since when does a photojournalist or a media outlet need permission to
take or publish pics?
\
When COMMON DECENCY suggests so, that's when!

There is nothing decent about war. What you want is to hide
the cost of the war that you want fought.

--
Ray Fischer

wrote:

...And if the picture was of you -- and the last memory your children
would have of you, would it still be okay to publish it?




Yes, absolutely. But I would like for the people showing it to note
that I died to prevent the atrocities perpetrated on the
innocent 9/11 victims from happening again. Absent that,
I would expect my family to point out to my children
how the left wing scum had used my image for their purposes.

Doug McDonald

On 2009-09-07 18:46:25 -0700, (Ray Fischer) said:

Doug McDonald wrote:
DG wrote:
If people are upset about the photo then they should blame the
politicians for the war, not the photographer for the image.

NO! They should blame the scum people who print it against
the family's wishes, and the people who
started the war: al Qaeda and the Taliban.

That's a rightard lie. It was Bush and the neocons who started the war.

There is nothing
wrong with the photographer taking it ... if the family
had agreed, publishing it would have been OK.

The soldier was there on the taxpayer's dime. The taxpayers have the
right to know how their money is being spent.

As a refugee of the 60's with a draft number of 54, "spent" is not what
I would have said. I would think the term used in my war would have
been more appropriate, "wasted!"

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Doug McDonald wrote:
wrote:

...And if the picture was of you -- and the last memory your children
would have of you, would it still be okay to publish it?




Yes, absolutely. But I would like for the people showing it to note
that I died to prevent the atrocities perpetrated on the
innocent 9/11 victims from happening again. Absent that,
I would expect my family to point out to my children
how the left wing scum had used my image for their purposes.

What's "left wing" about showing war as it is?
Can you see any correlation between peace and left:right politics here?:
http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/home.php

Kulvinder Singh Matharu wrote:
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,news,photograph-of-dying-marine-joshua-bernard-was-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?

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.

wrote:

...And if the picture was of you -- and the last memory your children
would have of you, would it still be okay to publish it?



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

Stephanie

Doug McDonald wrote:
wrote:
Kulvinder Singh Matharu wrote:
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,news,photograph-of-dying-marine-joshua-bernard-was-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?


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.



What about compensating images of al Qaeda's victims .. like the
hrrobly burned ones from 9/11, of the Taliban's victims.

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

Stephanie

Me wrote:
Doug McDonald wrote:
wrote:

...And if the picture was of you -- and the last memory your children
would have of you, would it still be okay to publish it?




Yes, absolutely. But I would like for the people showing it to note
that I died to prevent the atrocities perpetrated on the
innocent 9/11 victims from happening again. Absent that,
I would expect my family to point out to my children
how the left wing scum had used my image for their purposes.

What's "left wing" about showing war as it is?

When rightard wingnuts want to kill people, any criticism makes one a
"left wing scum". Too bad that there were not more "left wing scum"
living in Germany 70 years ago.

--
Ray Fischer