Christopher Anderson: Photographer of the Year
Upon further reflection, and after some conversation with Chris Anderson, I've decided to retract this story in almost its entirety. It was generally, as Chris said, extremely sloppy, and does not reflect very well upon the amount and quality of work I would like to put into a story.
What did I do right? In this story, almost nothing. I pointed to Mr. Anderson's award, and made reference to our previous conversation, but that was about it.
What was wrong? Just about everything. My cut-and-paste of the forum discussion leaves out some of the constructive criticism which was being levied by the assorted photographers, lumping them into categories which may or may not reflect their views or their opinions. As Chris said privately, I generally did not reflect their arguments correctly at all.
With all of that in mind, I offer my apologies to Chris and the other Lightstalkers for neglecting to put the proper effort into this article, and hope that my retraction and explanation are sufficient to appease those I may have offended.
Respectfully,
Brian Ledbetter
Snapped Shot
Christopher Anderson, who you may recall has interacted with us here at Snapped Shot, has been identified as the Magazine Photographer of the Year by Pictures of the Year, International (via Lightstalkers), not surprisingly for one of his dramatic photographs from the Middle East. In addition to the prize-winning photograph were pictures from the Gaza Strip, Beirut, and South America - at least the group acknowledges that a photographic world apart from the Middle East does indeed exist. Christopher's work, as you'll see, concentrates on the "downtrodden." You know, people like Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, the Palestinians, and other victims of "the Man" worldwide.
With those credentials in mind, it's a real shocker to see that he's the winner.
My heartiest congratulations, Mr. Anderson. Your highly-chargedpropaganda emotionality is clearly deserving of the recognition.
More updates follow the fold.
Welcome, Lightstalkers. For the record, I'm only slightly nutsy. Really! Feel free to pile on in the Comments section, though. All criticism is welcome, constructive or not!
In a quick update, it's interesting to note that Mr. Anderson's work is not universally admired, even amongst photojournalists. Professional jealousy? Intense competition? Or do little things like facts really matter?
From the Lightstalkers forum:
Misrepresenting an area as a slum, when it's not? Interesting.
The other Anderson (No relation, as far as I know) would probably lump yours truly in with the latter group of people, seeing how my negative interpretation of Latin American communism would likely be interpreted as a "lack" of understanding of the "history" and "present conditions," but nevertheless, it's interesting to note that he accuses the good Christopher Anderson of doing the same. The loony lefties here in the States check in, of course, to defend their beloved Marx:
Preston doesn't watch CNN, or read the New York Times, apparently, since they have expressed no problems with said shift.
An excellent point by Mr. Trotter. We shouldn't immediately conclude that Anderson wrote the captions in question. Except that his pages on Magnum's website should be under his own control, and the pages do represent the contentious areas as "slums" over there.
An excellent point by Carlos, even if it is unintentional.
Update: As always, it is my deepest pleasure to be a deeply-entrenched member of the "righ-wing wacko blogosphere."
Be sure to check out Chris' comments below, and the previous conversation for some history. Thanks for continuing to stop by, Chris, and of course, thanks for your openness as exhibited in your comments above. I'm as interested in "the truth" as you are, but suspect that we both might be approaching "it" from different angles. Or something to that effect.
Update: For the record, here's Chris' last e-mail to me from our previous debate. I think the inference he's trying to make is clear enough...
Okay, for full public transparency, let me be absolutely clear: I am a volunteer Zionist.
Update: Some interesting reactions.
Power of "the interwebs," my friend. I enjoy reading Lightstalkers daily, but it's mostly for the pictures. Honest!
This is not so much a "criticism," as it is me running into a familiar name on the internet, Michael. I do like the broad generalizations of we conservatives, though. What can I say? I do have a softness in my heart for black-and-white photography.
What did I do right? In this story, almost nothing. I pointed to Mr. Anderson's award, and made reference to our previous conversation, but that was about it.
What was wrong? Just about everything. My cut-and-paste of the forum discussion leaves out some of the constructive criticism which was being levied by the assorted photographers, lumping them into categories which may or may not reflect their views or their opinions. As Chris said privately, I generally did not reflect their arguments correctly at all.
With all of that in mind, I offer my apologies to Chris and the other Lightstalkers for neglecting to put the proper effort into this article, and hope that my retraction and explanation are sufficient to appease those I may have offended.
Respectfully,
Brian Ledbetter
Snapped Shot
Chris Anderson (photo by Marion Durand)
With those credentials in mind, it's a real shocker to see that he's the winner.
My heartiest congratulations, Mr. Anderson. Your highly-charged
More updates follow the fold.
Welcome, Lightstalkers. For the record, I'm only slightly nutsy. Really! Feel free to pile on in the Comments section, though. All criticism is welcome, constructive or not!
In a quick update, it's interesting to note that Mr. Anderson's work is not universally admired, even amongst photojournalists. Professional jealousy? Intense competition? Or do little things like facts really matter?
From the Lightstalkers forum:
Hmmm…I didn’t know El Alto in Bolivia was a slum. Never actually saw slums with city hall, mayor, a hospital and various public schools. Guess I went to the wrong Bolivia. Perhaps one’s perception of the world changes when your a local. Don’t mean to change the subject here but it is bad reporting.
by Carlos Cazalis Fri Mar 02 20:08:44 UTC 2007 (ed. Mar 2 2007) | Sao Paulo,Brazil
Misrepresenting an area as a slum, when it's not? Interesting.
actually Carlos to pick up on your point there, which is dead on, there are some other questionable aspects of his project that kind of bug me on the larger thematic level. The North American understanding of this putative “Shift to the Left†in Latin Am is seriously lacking in perspective, historical dimension and adequate definition of the real nature of this phenomenon. I am glad that the work can help to shift some media attention back to Latin Am, but I am very suspicious of how the political trends down here are being defined from outside by people who seem not to understand the history or present conditions well.
by Jon Anderson Fri Mar 02 21:46:01 UTC 2007 | Santo Domingo,Dominican Republic
The other Anderson (No relation, as far as I know) would probably lump yours truly in with the latter group of people, seeing how my negative interpretation of Latin American communism would likely be interpreted as a "lack" of understanding of the "history" and "present conditions," but nevertheless, it's interesting to note that he accuses the good Christopher Anderson of doing the same. The loony lefties here in the States check in, of course, to defend their beloved Marx:
Jon, in the American media, the usual adjective that precedes “shift to the left†is “dangerous.â€
by Preston Merchant Fri Mar 02 21:52:13 UTC 2007 | New York,United States
Preston doesn't watch CNN, or read the New York Times, apparently, since they have expressed no problems with said shift.
Hey Carlos, Your point is well-taken, though your charge of bad reporting may be misdirected at Chris. As you know, agency photographers have to rely on colleagues working in their offices to enter these competitions for them, often because they are on assignment far away at deadline time. I’m assuming here that you are referring to the short caption with the photo from El Alto in the Singles section of the Magazine Photographer of the Year portfolio from the previously cited link in this thread.
Keep in mind the enormous load of abuse that was heaped on Tyler Hicks by bloggers last year for a caption published with one of his photos from Lebanon in the New York Times that completely misrepresented what Tyler himself had written. Are you certain that Chris Anderson himself described El Alto as a slum, a term you dispute? Perhaps your argument could be with someone else rather than the photographer.
My point is to remind you that we all accept the loss of a degree of control when we release our photographs into the hands of others. I don’t know whether or not this has happened to you, but try to imagine how easily someone could misperceive your own perception of the housing issues you’ve photographed in Brazil if they were to read captions written by someone unfamiliar with the situation there. Would it be fair to condemn you in such a case?
Otherwise, hope you’re doing well down in Brazil and taking more great picture, amigo.
by John Trotter Fri Mar 02 22:04:20 UTC 2007 | Brooklyn, NY,United States
An excellent point by Mr. Trotter. We shouldn't immediately conclude that Anderson wrote the captions in question. Except that his pages on Magnum's website should be under his own control, and the pages do represent the contentious areas as "slums" over there.
What I question is the appropiate definition we give to things. ... [ed.: skipping the Bush vs. Ahmadinejad comparison for now] ... Some of you mentioned that perhaps Chris or Tyler did not caption his images. This is no excuse. This is their responsibility. I take great care in captioning properly precisely because of this. Sorry if I’m not off on assignment. This portfolio is not being published in a magazine it’s being submitted to a contest and could possibly tour and be seen by millions as well.
El Alto has some really awful parts of town but so does Rio de Janeiro, does that make the entire city a slum? The Prestes Maia building I’m shooting is in the smack center of Sao Paulo and I would call that a slum, but it doesn’t make the entire block one too. El Alto has 1 million people. It was illegitamly settled but is now an organized community in dire conditions but still a city. If it has drinkable water, bad sewage and is without electricity then some parts maybe be “slumatic� But I simple disagree with calling an entire city a slum. And if the pic was captioned by some assitant then Chris is the one to suffer, sure, but who is responsible?
Definitions do a lot of damage. Not all rhombuses are square but all squares are rhombuses.
...
by Carlos Cazalis Sat Mar 03 00:04:15 UTC 2007 | Sao Paulo,Brazil
An excellent point by Carlos, even if it is unintentional.
Update: As always, it is my deepest pleasure to be a deeply-entrenched member of the "righ-wing wacko blogosphere."
Thaks for keeping me honest. I do not pretend to be an expert on Latin America or even current events in Venezuela or Bolivia. I started photographing in these regions to seek understanding for myself…not to try and explain anything. My work is as much a personal discovery as it is anything else. I welcome advice and explanation from all of you who know much more about that part of the world than I. I am sure there are many problems with my pictures and captions that go deeper than my use of the word slum. I apologize. You are right that it is my responsibility. I take fulll blame. I am doing my best but as Rumsfeld says, there are things we know we don’t know and things we don’t know we don’t know. Make sense? Not to me either. I am trying to be as correct as possible, but I do make mistakes. However, in the case of slum: probably not the most accurate choice of word, I agree. But here is what Websters says: “a densely populated usually urban area marked by crowding, dirty run-down housing, poverty, and social disorganization.†we could bebate how exactly El Alto meets each one of these descriptions, but I need to go take pictures right now.
The truth is that El Alto is one of the poorest neighborhoods on the planet. Yes, by many estimates, poorer than places often described as “slums†in Rio and other cities. Oxfam goes as far to call it a “shantytownâ€, a name that I don’t agree with as the word shanty to me describes the kind of physical structures of a place. El Alto doesn’t really have buildings that I would describe as “shanty.â€
anyway, maybe you’ll be interested in how the righ-wing wacko blogsphere is using your discussions: http://www.snappedshot.com/archives/695-Christopher-Anderson-Photographer-of-the-Year.html
all best, Chris Anderson
by Chris Anderson Mon Mar 05 18:28:09 UTC 2007 | NYC/ Paris,United States
Be sure to check out Chris' comments below, and the previous conversation for some history. Thanks for continuing to stop by, Chris, and of course, thanks for your openness as exhibited in your comments above. I'm as interested in "the truth" as you are, but suspect that we both might be approaching "it" from different angles. Or something to that effect.
Update: For the record, here's Chris' last e-mail to me from our previous debate. I think the inference he's trying to make is clear enough...
...and by the way, noone reported *only* what Hez allowed to be reported. In the specific case of the guided tour, they SAW what hezbollah allowed them to see, but they reported whatever they wanted. Just as when they are embedded with the American military or the IDF they SEE only what they are allowed to see, but they report whatever they want.
Do you receive any money or financial support of any kind for your blog? Just curious. If so, in interest of full transparancy and truth, why don't you make this public?
Okay, for full public transparency, let me be absolutely clear: I am a volunteer Zionist.
Update: Some interesting reactions.
Wow! It’s pretty bizarre to have one’s comments lifted wholesale from a site where one is a member and have them posted-and rebutted-on an alien site. That would be my first “posting†in the right-wing wankosphere! Gotta love the google!
by Preston Merchant Mon Mar 05 18:42:49 UTC 2007 | New York,United States
Power of "the interwebs," my friend. I enjoy reading Lightstalkers daily, but it's mostly for the pictures. Honest!
chris,thanks for the link to that blog.i don’t really understand their criticism of you or lightstalkers.their main arguement seems to be that we don’t all share the same viewpoint? can someone explain to me why that is a bad thing?i know that in conservative circles there is a deeprooted fear of anything that upsets their cosy but actually non-existent status quo,but even they cannot honestly believe the world can be so black and white.can they?
by Michael Bowring Mon Mar 05 18:46:18 UTC 2007 | Belgrade,Serbia
This is not so much a "criticism," as it is me running into a familiar name on the internet, Michael. I do like the broad generalizations of we conservatives, though. What can I say? I do have a softness in my heart for black-and-white photography.
