If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
Ray Fischer wrote:
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. Ahhhhh. Godwins. But what the hell... "Left wing scum" and accusations of "evil" from "commies" or "socialists" is just normal reaction from cult evangelists for the Ayn Rand philosophy of economic rationalism, and they've been very active in forums and blogs for years. Worse than (but not so different from) scientologists. Here's one of Britain's leading "libertarians" behaving as a Nazi apologist, only mildly condemning fascism because they were "socialist" nationalists after all, but comparing them to the (undeniable evil) of Stalinist Russia, in a manner that suggests that Nazis weren't so bad, and Britain declaring war and fighting them wasn't a good idea for Britain's long term interests. Here's the link: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc099.htm This clearly shows that if you want, then you can rationalise pretty anything using individualist "rationalist" philosophy, including making excuses for one of the worst tyrants the world has known. Sometimes war is (always undesirable but) morally correct as a last resort. Bush's crusade wasn't. Libertarians aren't inherently left or right wing. That axis is one dimensional, and it's just not that simple. Libertarians strongly influence the US conservative movement especially WRT constitutional rights on gun control, anti-social welfare, anti regulation etc. The ideology is a cult - they have no answers (that fit their philosophy) to simple and real practical problems, like how to fund and run a fire department, deal with public health issues, or argue rationally why it's okay for anyone to own a handgun to use to shoot to kill to protect property, but can't answer if you should you be able to own a nuclear weapon to protect yourself (against socialist invasion perhaps?) and if not, then why not, as exactly the same argument applies, and pragmatism (one of several evils to them) would be needed to find an answer. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
On 2009-09-08 02:04:29 -0700, Giftzwerg said:
In article , real-address- says... 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 think the photographer is lucky to be alive. If you were trying to snap a photo of *my* dying buddy, I'd blow your head off on the spot. Unless the photog was one of his buddies. There have been snap happy GI's in the field since 35mm made it relatively easy to carry a "small" camera. My father used his Argus in New Guinea, The Phillipines and Okinawa. I used a Yashica Electro 35 in Nam. (i still have it, and it still works fine http://sn.im/rnzd2-un0 ) I can recall one squad which had more Nikons, Pentaxes & Kodaks than weapons. You shouldn't be surprised at what a 19-25 year old red blooded American boy will try to use a camera for. Today it is even easier for a grunt to be a field photographer, and he gets to upload files to family, friends, Facebook, or any sharing site when he gets back from an OP. ....and I am sure AP would not turn down any shots offered. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
Son, I bet you never served or saw war face to face. If you had, you would like it so much. In , on 09/07/2009 at 08:53 PM, Doug McDonald said: 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 |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
Ray Fischer wrote:
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. You've got to be kidding ... Even Obama does not claim that. One of his Czars that did sign on to a document claiming it lost his job yesterday, and that was one of the main reasons. The war was started by al Qaeda back in the 1990s, and restarted by them on Sept. 11, 2001. Doug McDonald |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
DG wrote:
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! Doug McDonald So your patriotism moves you to destroy the first amendment over "COMMON DECENCY"? Who's side are you on? on the side of good, not evil. Common decency is good. Just because the first amendment says they CAN publish, it does not mean they SHOULD. There are likely plenty of picture where the victim is unidentified and unidentifiable. Those, I do not apply this same criterion to. Note that the Left will use the same argument to say that their favorite victims' picture should not be published. They are hypocrites. Doug McDonald |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Photo of dying marine: was it right for AP to publish?
Twibil wrote:
On Sep 7, 9:49 pm, " 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? 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. But before Vietnam the press never actually **supported the enemy** as they do now. Doug McDonald |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Publish your writing, photo books and custom calendars and even video and audio - free to join | kaash | Digital Photography | 1 | July 29th 07 08:37 PM |
Looking for a few hobbyists to publish... | news.arcor.de | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | May 4th 05 02:52 PM |
Looking for great photos to publish! | Thistlegroup | Photographing Nature | 7 | April 14th 04 05:34 PM |