tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post5363140667036787266..comments2024-03-27T00:32:29.877-07:00Comments on Photos and Stuff: Ethical Photography, Where Do We Go From Here?amolitorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-63274942242798670492017-05-14T09:58:31.491-07:002017-05-14T09:58:31.491-07:00Well, a couple of thoughts. The guy executing the ...Well, a couple of thoughts. The guy executing the Viet Cong on the streets of Saigon was an ARVN general. Frankly, my tolerance for that kind of behavior, especially from an officer, is next to non-existent. <br />While I did not give it much thought at the time, the free-flowing, non-embeded journalists I came across never were a problem. They were all print or photojournalists. I might have been a bit more apprehensive had they been TV ones with all their 'stuff.' The ones I encountered were all very low key. I don't recall them ever talking to me or any of my officers. They hung out with the troops. We made sure they got C-Rations and water, but that was about it. Also, my cohort had all read Bernard Fall, and had great appreciation and respect for him and his work, and that certainly was reflected in the way we dealt with all journalists. Of course, the other thing is that in combat, and in the pre-digital age, ones/my view of what was going on 'in country' was pretty much limited to how far I could see. As I read somewhere the other day, it was 'like looking through a straw from 3000 feet' or something like that.christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05057172033456543944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-22190557219167843602017-05-13T21:24:48.594-07:002017-05-13T21:24:48.594-07:00That is another very salient angle, I think.
In m...That is another very salient angle, I think.<br /><br />In many cases, we see people making rules and guidelines which, while apparently compassionate and sensible, also serve the needs of the rule-makers.<br /><br />In fact, it is a rare case anywhere in life that the makers of the rules don't, somehow, manage to consistently craft rules that benefit the makers of the rules.<br /><br />The US government, especially the military, is no exception! I think "embedding" journalists is another relevant issue, the aim is overtly to control the message. The bad old days of PJs simply wandering all over Vietnam are no good.<br /><br />I think the message *should* be controlled, to a degree. We got boys out there being boys, and they don't necessarily need that splashed over the front page.<br /><br />Eddie Adams photo of that one dude shooting the guy pretty much screwed the shooter's life up, unfairly. Not that executing guys in the street is something I can get behind, but it happened, and lots of dudes didn't get photographed doing it. Also, how cool is it to publish some recognizable guy's execution? In today's terms, we are asked to think of his family, etc. Taking that shot, publishing it, well, there's an ethical quagmire right there, isn't it?<br /><br />So, embedding removes some of THOSE issues, but raises a whole bunch more (like allowing the USA to get away with some ugly shit). For a country with "no boots on the ground" in Syria, we seem to have a hell of a lot of guys (and planes, and trucks, and all the Stuff) running around in country. I guess they're all wearing slippers or something. Not seeing a huge number of photos of any of that though.<br /><br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-89166654782934571092017-05-13T16:19:47.256-07:002017-05-13T16:19:47.256-07:00I'd like to throw another thought into the hop...I'd like to throw another thought into the hopper and that is the prohibition of showing the photos of members of the armed forces killed in combat. Now, to a certain extent,I will buy the argument that it is out of respect and concern for the relatives of those killed in action. However, the reality, to me, is that by having this prohibition, it makes it a lot easier for our government to continue to engage in endless warfare. Which rational is more valid - take your pick.christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05057172033456543944noreply@blogger.com