1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Would you do it?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by proudpittsburgher, Aug 3, 2006.

  1. Sorry if this has already been revisited, and sorry it's not sports-related. Just a question. Would you use the photo at the top of the page or not? I know many papers have policies in place, but this is more of a personal issue. Me, I wouldn't run it. There really is no need to see a dead one year old. The only point would be to make it known the severity of what is going on over there, but I think people already know that.

  2. STLIrish

    STLIrish Active Member

    Man. That certainly catches the eye doesn't it.
    I'd probably run it inside. On the front above the fold like that seems a bit much.
    But it's certainly a powerful photo.
  3. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    Never mind the picture. Minnesota trails the Yankees by 1A games ?!?
  4. soccer dad

    soccer dad Guest

    im tired of people saying we have to sanitize things because people might be offended.

    whats going on over there is war. we have to describe what is happeningn to the best -- and most honest -- of our abilities. if that baby was killed, we have to show it and we have to explain it.
  5. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    Exactly right. The people who don't want to see such a photograph are the people who need to see photographs like that.

    War is not a Nintendo game and there's nothing glorious about it. That pic is an excellent reminder of those facts. I'd have run it bigger.
  6. Matt Foley

    Matt Foley Member

    I would've used a picture of batboy

  7. So I take it that you would also like to see beheadings broadcast in prime time.
  8. leo1

    leo1 Active Member

    the pioneer press has about 10-20 competent journalists still on staff. the other 100 or so have fled for greener pastures over the past few years. seriously it's a sinking ship. just a question of how long the ship will stay afloat before sinking for good.
  9. So you think that average Joe who picks up his paper in the morning says, "Holy shit, Alice. I knew things were bad over there but I didn't know innocent kids were being killed. I see it right here on the front page of the Pioneer Press! This is some big news now!"?

    Sex happens too, but we don't broadcast it during early morning cartoons. Just because the photo doesn't offend you doesn't mean it won't your average subscriber. So are you telling me that the newspaper shouldn't give a damn about them, which I'm guessing, is more than half of the readership?
  10. pallister

    pallister Guest

    In the words of David Byrne, pp, stop making sense.
  11. How does one possibly follow from the other?
  12. tyler durden 71351

    tyler durden 71351 Active Member

    No way, not above the fold on 1-A. Maybe inside. Maybe, if someone made a hell of a good argument for the photo. There are other pictures that show how messed up things are over there right now, that don't feature a dead baby.
    This brings me to a point: Papers (or the ones I'm familiar with) never run body photos or body bag photos if a staff photographer shoots them. But they'll run photos of dead children if they're from the other side of the world and shot by the AP. What gives?
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page