Snapped Shot

Always Watching the All-Seeing Eye

 

The company REUTERS keeps

By Brian C. Ledbetter · Thursday, August 17. 2006 22:46
Omar Abed Qusini, via web conference
One quick question: Is it appropriate for photographers who are members of a group called Artists Against the War (or translated via google) to be sent into war zones to document the events as they transpire? And, even if Mr. Qusini were not a member of this group, would his objectivity still be called into question by his association with them?

I mean, can we expect someone of that nature to be non-partial in their coverage of events?

Can we trust that they'd be able to tell us the truth about something they're wholly opposed to?

I'd certainly like to hear what you think, whether you're an interested observer, or are a wire photographer. Do memberships in groups like this affect the coverage you would expect from current events?
· permalink · Israel/Lebanon War 2006 · Comments (5) · Trackbacks (0)
Defined tags for this entry: , ,
Related entries by tags:
Reuters Interprets Scripture
Bow to Toyota™
Hamas Does Public Relations
My Kind of Laboratory!
Reuters' Priorities
 
Snap.com Popups

If they're driving you crazy, please click here to disable them on this website.




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments [RSS]
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Here is what a handful of random people think about this article. But first, the fine print:
The opinions expressed here, even where approved for display, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this website, the management, or any other entity or organization, with the exception of the Vast Zionist Conspiracy. Those opinions we represent in style, yo. Please keep the language in these comments clean, as this is intended to be a family-friendly, work-friendly website. Comments not compliant with this policy will be edited for content where necessary. Abusive or otherwise illegal comments will be reported to the proper authorities, up to and including the aforementioned Vast Zionist Conspiracy. The Management cannot and will not be held responsible for commenters making a spectacle of themselves, even if The Management are the said commenters in question. In other words, don't take yourself so seriously, folks. We're all here to discuss the news, and more importantly, to have fun. Now go get yourself into some OCD treatment program—you obviously need it if you actually read all of this mess.

mr nobody on 2006-08-19 09:23 #1
*Lets put it this way Brian, reading your blog I wouldn't trust you to provide objective coverage of any photojournalism-related topic, let alone a middle eastern war. Does that answer your question?
Reply  
Brian on 2006-08-19 11:06 #1.1
*The difference between mainstream photojournalism and me, is that you will never find me going around claiming to be the only source of "unbiased" information about any given topic.

The press, on the other hand, insists that they, and only they, can give us "unbiased" information, yet when you look at their reports, it's fairly clear that they prefer one side over the other.

Which position sounds more honest to you?
Reply  
Woody Berch on 2006-08-23 13:01 #2
*I'm trying to get in touch with Omar Abed -- if you know his email or if you're reading this, could you send me an email? I have a question about getting a photograph you took at the Askar invasion last week when the IOF destroyed the Annadi house.

Hope to hear from someone.

Best,

WB
Reply  
Tom on 2007-10-26 19:28 #3
*It beggers belief to think that someone with so obviously skewed and biased interpretations of photographs and reports on subjects you have so obviously little personal experience of can claim to be revealing the bias in said reports, photographs etc.

This is some of the most biased and subjective social and political commentary I have ever read. Especially galling is the tone of your writing which is distinctly pompous and self righteous.

Exposing Photojournalism? Objectivity? I see nothing of the kind here.

For example, to suggest (using the thinly disguised rhetoric and italicised emphasis) that a member of a group called Artists Against The War is incapable of adequately reporting on conflict based upon their professed views on the nature of warfare is preposterous. I have met many conflict photographers who are wholly against warfare and report on it in order to show how brutal the reality of war is and how it is one of the most horrific of all humankind's activities. If this is what you would regard as a biased view then you should perhaps don a flak jacket and go to a warzone yourself in order to show us the content and form of unbiased war reporting.

I'd just like to briefly asses one quote from yourself:

"Can we trust that they'd be able to tell us the truth about something they're wholly opposed to?"

To suggest that someone with an opinion on something cannot tell the 'truth' about that something reveals a whole host of flaws in your general outlook and completely negates the validity of your statements. You claim to have the thread of common sense and logic pervading your life, yet you can write the above statement without realising the paradoxical nature of it within it's context?

It is a shame, because reasoned critique of the media and it's output is sorely needed, however after reading several posts then I can only conclude that this blog is not the place where I will find it.
Reply  
Brian C. Ledbetter on 2007-10-27 12:15 #4
*Tom,

If you can explain how this, this, this, this, and this are "anti-war," I'm all ears. From where I'm sitting, these photographers are most certainly not anti-war, but are in fact quite pro-war, so long as people who hate the West are winning.

As far as the predominant focus on the Middle East that you noticed here? I subscribe to as many photo wires as humanly possible, and you know what? On any given weekday, over 100 photographs are published from both Iraq and Afghanistan each, every day. After that, there are generally 80-100 published from "Palestine," a majority of which focuses on Palestinian terrorists. This is followed by Lebanon (60-80 photos a day), and if nothing major is happening, Pakistan and Iran (20-60 photos a day).

You catch what I'm saying here? A majority of the focus of photojournalists is on the Middle East. Is it my fault for pointing that out? Hardly.

I do occasionally cover other areas, though, so it's not like I'm a one-trick pony. I'm just mostly a one-trick pony.

;-)

Hope this helps explain the issues you've taken with my website. And please do keep in touch, even if it is merely to criticize me. I welcome inputs from all viewpoints, and will gladly give space to just about anyone who is mad at me. If that makes me "pompous," then I reckon I'm guilty as charged.

Regards,
Brian
Reply  

Add Comment

HTML-Tags will be converted to Entities.
Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.
BBCode format allowed
Gravatar/MyBlogLog/Favatar/Pavatar author images supported.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA