Ike photo question

[joe_schmoe]

I've temporarily changed my avatar because it was the quickest way to a version of this AP photo.

Here's the cutline:
Two dogs were left in a back yard of a home were the storm surge of Hurricane Ike is rising, on Friday, Sept. 12, 2008 in San Leon, Texas. Hurricane warnings were in effect over a 400-mile stretch of coastline from south of Corpus Christi to Morgan City, La. Tropical storm warnings extended south almost to the Mexican border and east to the Mississippi-Alabama line, including New Orleans. (AP Photo/Kim Christensen)

Would you run that photo, knowing what the dogs fate likely is about to be?

 

[Babs]

Dogs are better swimmers than people, aren't they? Maybe they will be OK.

 

[Angola!]

Dogs are better swimmers than people, aren't they? Maybe they will be OK.

True, but they can't climb roof's and whatnot as well as a person could.

As to the thread question, won't there be better art later?

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Yes.

 

[Jay Sherman]

 

[DemoChristian]

I wouldn't decide against the photo because the dogs probably died. That just seems silly.

 

[imjustagirl]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

 

[DemoChristian]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

I thought that too, Mrs. Tyrie.
Journalistically, I think you should.
But as a human being, I don't think I could.
It'd be a rare case where I was a journalist second.

 

[imjustagirl]

Mrs. Tyrie.

:-*

 

[DemoChristian]

 

[slappy4428]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

Yup... I agree. Ms. Slappy sees this thread and she's going to be pissed.

 

[joe_schmoe]

I honestly don't know how I could even take the photo to begin with.
I don't know how I could leave them there. Those poor things have no idea whats about to happen. That's the sad reality.
A person you see on a roof top or something, you could at least say hey, they knew what was coming. they had a chance. It'd still be hard not to try to help them, but it's justified. Hard to see those dogs and not try to do something. Then again, if you're down there on this assignment, they probably weren't the last left behind animals you saw that day.

And I will be removing the photo in a few hours, for my own sanity if nothing else.

 

[slappy4428]

I honestly don't know how I could even take the photo to begin with.
I don't know how I could leave them there. Those poor things have no idea whats about to happen. That's the sad reality.
A person you see on a roof top or something, you could at least say hey, they knew what was coming. they had a chance. It'd still be hard not to try to help them, but it's justified. Hard to see those dogs and not try to do something. Then again, if you're down there on this assignment, they probably weren't the last left behind animals you saw that day.

And I will be removing the photo in a few hours, for my own sanity if nothing else.

But while you can;t save every animal, you could say you made an effort and the difference...

 

[buckweaver]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

I'd do the same. With no hesitation, and no ethical regrets.

Always be a human being first. You do not give up your humanity to practice journalism, no matter what the mouth-breathers say.

 

[Sam Mills 51]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

I'd do the same. With no hesitation, and no ethical regrets.

Always be a human being first. You do not give up your humanity to practice journalism, no matter what the mouth-breathers say.

WFW. In this case, given that you've already made the effort to go out there and shoot the photo, how difficult would it be to at least make the effort to see if there's something you can do.

One might stop being a journalist, but one can never stop being a human being.

 

[editorhoo]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

I'd do the same. With no hesitation, and no ethical regrets.

Always be a human being first. You do not give up your humanity to practice journalism, no matter what the mouth-breathers say.

I resepctfully disagree. As journalists, we are to report on what happens and not to participate in any way on what is unfolding before our eyes, and I'll give two extreme examples of why I believe so.

First, I remember a basketball game I covered where there was an issue as to how much time should be on the clock. I had the time of the last stoppage in my notes and was asked by the officials as to how much time should be on the clock, and I respectfully declined to offer my opinion, pointing out that I was there only to observe and not have any effect on the events at hand.

Second, I was taught in J-School that if you are covering an event and someone is dying right before your eyes, you DO NOT aid them in any way. If that person was meant to die, then so be it. Point being, you are there to cover an event and not to have a hand in ANYTHING that goes on at said event. It may sound harsh, but it's part of a code of ethics I adhere to.

When I'm on the job, I'm an observer, not a particpator. Feel free to disagree.

 

[Angola!]

I realize we're not the story...but there's no way I could take that picture then leave those dogs there. I'm sorry.

I'd do the same. With no hesitation, and no ethical regrets.

Always be a human being first. You do not give up your humanity to practice journalism, no matter what the mouth-breathers say.

I resepctfully disagree. As journalists, we are to report on what happens and not to participate in any way on what is unfolding before our eyes, and I'll give two extreme examples of why I believe so.

First, I remember a basketball game I covered where there was an issue as to how much time should be on the clock. I had the time of the last stoppage in my notes and was asked by the officials as to how much time should be on the clock, and I respectfully declined to offer my opinion, pointing out that I was there only to observe and not have any effect on the events at hand.

Second, I was taught in J-School that if you are covering an event and someone is dying right before your eyes, you DO NOT aid them in any way. If that person was meant to die, then so be it. Point being, you are there to cover an event and not to have a hand in ANYTHING that goes on at said event. It may sound harsh, but it's part of a code of ethics I adhere to.

When I'm on the job, I'm an observer, not a particpator. Feel free to disagree.

So, you're saying I should quit drinking fifths of whiskey during work?

 

[buckweaver]

I resepctfully disagree. As journalists, we are to report on what happens and not to participate in any way on what is unfolding before our eyes, and I'll give two extreme examples of why I believe so.

First, I remember a basketball game I covered where there was an issue as to how much time should be on the clock. I had the time of the last stoppage in my notes and was asked by the officials as to how much time should be on the clock, and I respectfully declined to offer my opinion, pointing out that I was there only to observe and not have any effect on the events at hand.

Second, I was taught in J-School that if you are covering an event and someone is dying right before your eyes, you DO NOT aid them in any way. If that person was meant to die, then so be it. Point being, you are there to cover an event and not to have a hand in ANYTHING that goes on at said event. It may sound harsh, but it's part of a code of ethics I adhere to.

When I'm on the job, I'm an observer, not a particpator. Feel free to disagree.

First, a clock stoppage in a basketball game is not remotely comparable to watching death unfold before your eyes. I understand you used an extreme example, so I won't belabor the point.

Second, the code of ethics I adhere to is this: I would not, for even one second, be able to look at myself in the mirror again if I took that photo and then left those dogs to die. Not for one second. Not if there was a reasonable chance to help them.

It is one thing to be a combat correspondent and watch the soldiers you're covering go off to die. It's quite another to take a photo of two dogs, write a caption that basically foretells their imminent deaths, and walk away from that scene because of some ivory tower ethical code that says you are an inhuman observer, a robot, instead of a participant.

Sorry, that's not ethics to me. That's a cop-out for not doing what's right.

You don't have to save every cat or cow that crosses the road on your way out of town; I'm not saying that. But you're still a human being, whether you have a press pass or not. And when the storm passes, you're going to have to look yourself in the mirror. Some may be OK with that decision, and I wouldn't judge anybody if they did. But not me.

 

[editorhoo]

No, by all means, hit the sauce. It helps in this biz.

 

[editorhoo]

Buck,

I think we can respectfully agree to disagree. Not saying either one of us is right on a moral level, just that we have our different views, that's all. When I'm working, I don't feel it's my place to determine what's morally correct as a human being, only to describe what is happening. That's all, period.

FYI, I live with four dogs and am an animal lover.

Peace.