And They Wonder Why Many Reporters Are Universally Hated

This is a discussion on And They Wonder Why Many Reporters Are Universally Hated within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by Defensive Arms SatCong made the following statement, that YOU very clearly agreed with: Your response to SatCong: Yep, you're definitely being intellectually ...

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 78

Thread: And They Wonder Why Many Reporters Are Universally Hated

  1. #46
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    SatCong made the following statement, that YOU very clearly agreed with:



    Your response to SatCong:



    Yep, you're definitely being intellectually dishonest.
    I agreed with his statement that it was wrong, and I still agree with that. In his face or not, it was wrong.
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    His family's wishes don't trump the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    Gory war photos have been publicly disseminated since at least World War One, so no precedent was set here. No line was crossed that hasn't already been crossed many times in the last century.

    Sorry, but Constitutional Law nor any other form of American law recognize the non-existent right to privacy that you mention above.

    The Constitution may be the law of the land, but what is morally right and wrong is hardly limited to the Constitution. Just because something has been done before doesn't make it morally right to do so. Just because you legally can do something does it mean that it should always be done?

    I just hope that if you should breath your last breath in a public place that the people there allow you die with as much dignity as possible, and don't stand there snapping pictures of you as you leave this world.

    I don't know if you ever served in the military or not, but if you did you know those that do *and* their families give up a lot. Would freedom of speech or our form of government collapse by honoring this grieving family's request to not publish the picture?
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  4. #48
    Member Array Defensive Arms's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    I agreed with his statement that it was wrong, and I still agree with that. In his face or not, it was wrong.
    Which is your opinion, that you are most certainly entitled to.

    I disagree completely, which I am entitled to do.

    Thankfully, you're not the moral arbiter for the nation.
    "I've run across shooting after shooting where the defender shot a violent aggressor with a .380 and did little to immediately stop his depredations. A good hollow point load in 9mm or .38 Special will, historically, end lethal assaults more quickly."

    ~ Massad Ayoob

  5. #49
    Senior Member Array Herknav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Waypoint 0
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by SatCong View Post
    But you don't get in some one face when they are dying, that's a low life.
    I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm disagreeing with the quaint (naive?) notion that journalists somehow are there to "bring you the truth." ;)

    Herk
    I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on Earth.--Steve McQueen

  6. #50
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    Which is your opinion, that you are most certainly entitled to.

    I disagree completely, which I am entitled to do.

    Thankfully, you're not the moral arbiter for the nation.
    I was thinking the same about you.
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  7. #51
    Member Array Defensive Arms's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    The Constitution may be the law of the land, but what is morally right and wrong is hardly limited to the Constitution. Just because something has been done before doesn't make it morally right to do so.
    Morally wrong only in your personal opinion.

    I just hope that if you should breath your last breath in a public place that the people there allow you die with as much dignity as possible, and don't stand there snapping pictures of you as you leave this world.
    See, you're STILL trying to give the false impression that the photographer was "standing there", nonchalantly "snapping pictures"---even though you earlier specifically denied doing so.

    That's dishonesty on your part, which isn't moral.

    The TRUTH is that the contingent of Marines, which would include the photographer traveling with them, was ambushed by Taliban fighters.

    The photographer was behind cover and in serious danger herself, when she took the photograph at a substantial distance with a telephoto lens.

    She was NOT "standing around" taking gruesome photos, nor did she take ANY close-up shots.

    In fact, the photographer was still behind cover when Lance Corporal Bernard's compatriots converged on him, and med evac'd him from the scene.

    War photographers aren't there to sugar coat things for the public, they're there to show war as it really is, which she did. As previously noted, she did nothing that hasn't been done MANY times before in combat, going back to at least World War I.

    In fact, the infamous Fallujah bridge photos of the beaten, shot, burned, dragged and hanged Blackwater employees were FAR MORE gruesome. Not to mention that there were considerably more photos taken at Fallujah, and they were publicly disseminated far more widely than LC Bernard's.
    "I've run across shooting after shooting where the defender shot a violent aggressor with a .380 and did little to immediately stop his depredations. A good hollow point load in 9mm or .38 Special will, historically, end lethal assaults more quickly."

    ~ Massad Ayoob

  8. #52
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    You still don't get it. Her proximity isn't the issue (at least not for me). Is there some magical distance where it's OK to snap pictures of a Marine as his life drains away?

    Yes, other even more gruesome pictures have made the news. But with one difference. Those people hanging from the bridge were already dead. The Marine was going through the last moments of his life as she snapped away. She could have shown him some respect by not viewing the process of his dying as a photo op.

    They could have honored his family's request to not publish the photo. If they want pictures of those that have given their lives, they need not worry. There will be plenty more where the family won't object. This young Marine gave his life for his country, and they can't honor a simple request from his family?

    And if you really think reporters are there to "show war as it really is" then what else can I say?
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  9. #53
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    Morally wrong only in your personal opinion.
    Ahhh, moral relativity again.

    Why is it that those who consider morality a matter of opinion consistently espouse an immoral position?

  10. #54
    Member Array Defensive Arms's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    Ahhh, moral relativity again.

    Why is it that those who consider morality a matter of opinion consistently espouse an immoral position?
    No moral relativity to my position.

    You and everbody else on your side of the argument---have NOT established in any way, shape or form that yours is the "morally correct" position.

    What are you basing your claim to "moral correctness" on? Show me where God supports your position. Show me where the Holy Bible supports your position. Show me where the U.S. Constitution supports your position.

    And you're telling a blatant falsehood when you claim that I'm saying ALL morality is a matter of opinion. As a born again Christian for the last 37 years, I'm well aware of what REAL moral correctness is, because I base my morality on a verifiable and established standard---the Holy Bible.

    Whereas you are basing your position in this thread only on your own bogus opinion and ego-driven, hypocritical self-righteousness.
    "I've run across shooting after shooting where the defender shot a violent aggressor with a .380 and did little to immediately stop his depredations. A good hollow point load in 9mm or .38 Special will, historically, end lethal assaults more quickly."

    ~ Massad Ayoob

  11. #55
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    No moral relativity to my position.

    You and everbody else on your side of the argument---have NOT established in any way, shape or form that yours is the "morally correct" position.

    What are you basing your claim to "moral correctness" on? Show me where God supports your position. Show me where the Holy Bible supports your position. Show me where the U.S. Constitution supports your position.

    And you're telling a blatant falsehood when you claim that I'm saying ALL morality is a matter of opinion. As a born again Christian for the last 37 years, I'm well aware of what REAL moral correctness is, because I base my morality on a verifiable and established standard---the Holy Bible.

    Whereas you are basing your position in this thread only on your own bogus opinion and ego-driven, hypocritical self-righteousness.
    I don't think the Bible ever addressed the moral issues of photographers in combat situations, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

    Quick question if I may? Did you ever serve in the military?

    I've found over the years that it tends to have a huge impact on ones perspectives in such matters.
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  12. #56
    Member Array Defensive Arms's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    Yes, other even more gruesome pictures have made the news. But with one difference. Those people hanging from the bridge were already dead. The Marine was going through the last moments of his life as she snapped away. She could have shown him some respect by not viewing the process of his dying as a photo op.
    [sarcasm] Oh, I'll bet the fact that the Blackwater employees were already dead really made a BIG difference to their mothers and other family members---when they picked up the paper and saw photographs of their beaten, shot, burned and dragged bodies hanging from a bridge half a world away. Yessiree bob, I'll bet that was SUCH A RELIEF to their family members. [/sarcasm]

    How do you know the photographer viewed it as a "photo op"? Are you now claiming to have the ability to read minds after the fact? You've never spoken to her in your life, yet you're making a serious character judgment about somebody you've never even met.

    Quite frankly, when that rocket propelled grenade hit LC Bernard, not terribly far from her own position, I SERIOUSLY doubt that she was thinking---"Oh gee, what a GREAT photo op! I'm gonna get a BIG promotion and salary increase out of this! I'm gonna be famous, yeehaw!"

    Like probably every Marine in that unit when the Taliban launched their ambush, she was PLENTY SCARED. It most likely took every ounce of courage she had to even stick her head up long enough to snap a picture after LC Bernard got hit, so I'm EXTREMELY skeptical that she was "relishing the moment" as a "photo op".

    She was doing the job she was paid to do, at great danger to her own life. A war photographer's job isn't easy or safe, plenty of them have been wounded or killed in action over the years.

    They don't take those risks in order to get the politically correct propaganda photos of smiling soldiers giving candy to foreign children. They're there for photos that show what war is REALLY about.

    Unfortunately, many Americans sitting safely in their homes aren't interested in seeing what war is REALLY about. No, they're more interested in the "important" things in life, like playing golf or going to the flea market. Don't anyone dare publish the hard truth, because the sheep don't like being disturbed while immersed in their "comfort zone".

    And if you really think reporters are there to "show war as it really is" then what else can I say?
    I see. And I suppose you know ALL U.S. war photographers personally, and are thus able to make judgments of their intent and character.

    If they were just after money, there are a lot of far easier and safer ways to do it than travel with a Marine Corps contingent in a war zone. Putting themselves in harm's way from armed Taliban soldiers with rocket propelled grenades and other weaponry, isn't generally something that people do on a "greedy whim".

    It's not unusual for war photographers to get injured or killed in combat. They could've made plenty of money as fashion photographers back home. But thankfully, some people aren't sheep.
    "I've run across shooting after shooting where the defender shot a violent aggressor with a .380 and did little to immediately stop his depredations. A good hollow point load in 9mm or .38 Special will, historically, end lethal assaults more quickly."

    ~ Massad Ayoob

  13. #57
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,465
    +1.

    There was no way for her to know at the time she took the picture that he would later die.

  14. #58
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,122
    Let me put my spin on this issue:

    Points and counterpoints:

    Reporters are only after a Pulitzer. That's like saying Paramedics (I'll use my own profession as example) are only after that "Outstanding EMS provider" trophy given at the Christmas banquet. Sure, we'd all like to be recognized for a job well done, but very few of us 'brown nose' to get it. We do a good job because we have personal and professional standards.

    Sarcasm: Reporters are there to bring us the truth. There are some bad apples who may steer a story, but I believe most still have truth as a guiding principle. Pictures, especially this picture, does not lie. It is what it is.

    The press is a business, in business to make money. True, but traditionally the press is enshrined in the Constitution and colonial America as an institution that balances the government's powers.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  15. #59
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    [sarcasm] Oh, I'll bet the fact that the Blackwater employees were already dead really made a BIG difference to their mothers and other family members---when they picked up the paper and saw photographs of their beaten, shot, burned and dragged bodies hanging from a bridge half a world away. Yessiree bob, I'll bet that was SUCH A RELIEF to their family members. [/sarcasm].
    You still don't get it, and perhaps you don't want to get it. I'm not just talking about the family, but about the dying Marine himself. By taking pictures of a dying man (not yet dead) she disrespected HIM. Or is this concept beyond you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    How do you know the photographer viewed it as a "photo op"? Are you now claiming to have the ability to read minds after the fact? You've never spoken to her in your life, yet you're making a serious character judgment about somebody you've never even met.]
    She took pictures, so it's obvious she viewed it as an opportunity to take pictures. In other words, a photo op. No mind reading needed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    Quite frankly, when that rocket propelled grenade hit LC Bernard, not terribly far from her own position, I SERIOUSLY doubt that she was thinking---"Oh gee, what a GREAT photo op! I'm gonna get a BIG promotion and salary increase out of this! I'm gonna be famous, yeehaw!" .
    So now she took pictures but without thinking about taking pictures? Amazing....

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    Like probably every Marine in that unit when the Taliban launched their ambush, she was PLENTY SCARED. It most likely took every ounce of courage she had to even stick her head up long enough to snap a picture after LC Bernard got hit, so I'm EXTREMELY skeptical that she was "relishing the moment" as a "photo op".
    I never said she relished the incident, but she wasn't too scared to take pictures of him as he died, therefore it was an opportunity to take photos. A photo op.

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    She was doing the job she was paid to do, at great danger to her own life. A war photographer's job isn't easy or safe, plenty of them have been wounded or killed in action over the years."
    And this makes what she did OK because.....?

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    They don't take those risks in order to get the politically correct propaganda photos of smiling soldiers giving candy to foreign children. They're there for photos that show what war is REALLY about."
    Let me guess.... You *know* this is true because you know each and every one of them? None of them do it to advance their career? All of them have nothing but noble intentions to tell the "truth"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    Unfortunately, many Americans sitting safely in their homes aren't interested in seeing what war is REALLY about. No, they're more interested in the "important" things in life, like playing golf or going to the flea market. Don't anyone dare publish the hard truth, because the sheep don't like being disturbed while immersed in their "comfort zone". ."
    So if the dying Marine get's disrespected in the process, it's all worth it? I've got news for you. Unless you have been in a place like that, all the pictures in the world aren't going to give you the "truth". Pictures are like any other form of media. They can all be used to give one version of the "truth".

    If you think you're going to learn some great truth from a few pictures, I've got a bridge in NY you might be interested in. Speaking of "truth". Half the time these vaunted reporters can't even get basic facts right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    I see. And I suppose you know ALL U.S. war photographers personally, and are thus able to make judgments of their intent and character. "
    I was going to ask you the same thing. After all, you seem to think they all have nothing but the most noble intentions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    If they were just after money, there are a lot of far easier and safer ways to do it than travel with a Marine Corps contingent in a war zone. Putting themselves in harm's way from armed Taliban soldiers with rocket propelled grenades and other weaponry, isn't generally something that people do on a "greedy whim"..
    But it's also a great way up the food chain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    It's not unusual for war photographers to get injured or killed in combat. They could've made plenty of money as fashion photographers back home.
    But that doesn't move you up the media food chain like being a reporter in a combat zone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    But thankfully, some people aren't sheep.
    Like the dying Marine she showed no respect for.
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  16. #60
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,006
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    Yy taking pictures of a dying man (not yet dead) she disrespected HIM. Or is this concept beyond you?
    You should explain it.

    It's not "disrespect" merely because someone says it's so. That's simply how someone infers the action. (And, leaving it with "it's beyond you" doesn't explain anything. It merely leaves folks who don't yet understand your perspective still wondering what the justification is for claiming the action disrespectful or a dishonor.)

    Where is the disrespect, from your viewpoint? Help us understand why you feel it's disrespectful. Be specific, as that might help.

    BTW, I have had friends and relatives pass, and a couple times photographs were taken. I have also seen first-responder handling of injuries/deaths immediately following a situation (car crash) or natural disaster (severe earthquake with fallen buildings), situations where people were being photographed. In these instances, I saw no particular disrespect or dishonor being shoveled by the people with cameras merely because they were "capturing the moment," as you say. Though, none of these instances were on a battlefield. Perhaps some feel that changes everything in some material way(s) that should be clarified.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Reporters View on Virginias pro-gun efforts....
    By concealed in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: February 2nd, 2009, 11:41 PM
  2. T.V. Reporters and politicians with a badge...
    By HKR in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: March 15th, 2008, 08:56 PM
  3. most hated??
    By jahwarrior72 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: March 15th, 2007, 05:19 PM
  4. I hated my G2........until now.
    By clipse in forum Related Gear & Equipment
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 7th, 2006, 09:23 AM

Search tags for this page

paul-salopek

,

reporters are hated

Click on a term to search for related topics.