And They Wonder Why Many Reporters Are Universally Hated - Page 5

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 nedrgr21 +1. There was no way for her to know at the time she took the picture that he would later die. ...

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 78

Thread: And They Wonder Why Many Reporters Are Universally Hated

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    +1.

    There was no way for her to know at the time she took the picture that he would later die.
    "That's when I realized there was a casualty and saw the injured Marine, about 10 yards from where I'd stood," Jacobson would write in her journal. "For the second time in my life, I watched a Marine lose his. He was hit with the RPG which blew off one of his legs and badly mangled the other. ... I hadn't seen it happen, just heard the explosion. I hit the ground and lay as flat as I could and shot what I could of the scene."

    Bernard lay on the ground, two Marines standing over him exposed, trying to help. A first tourniquet on Bernard's leg broke. A medic applied another.

    "I can't breathe, I can't breathe," Bernard said. Troops crawling under the bullets dragged him to the MRAP, the mine-resistant armored vehicle that accompanied the patrol.


    One leg gone, the other badly mangled plus difficulty in breathing. No she didn't know he was going to die, but with wounds like that and given the overall situation it was a very real possibility if not a probability. Yes many people survive such woulds and even worse, but many more do not.

    But even if she didn't have a clue, I'm pretty certain LCpl Bernard probably thought he was dying, and to have someone take pictures of you in that situation doesn't sit well with me. Imagine yourself in a bad car accident. You're laying there bleeding to death while onlookers pull out their cell phones and take pictures of you. Even before your body is cold you are a thing of interest, not a human being.
    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. #62
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    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.
    Maybe it has something to do with the way I was raised and the military culture I grew up in. We always were taught that fallen members of the Armed Forces be treated with nothing but honor and respect. I extend this to fallen Law Enforcement Officers as well. These are people who gave their very lives for all of us and in my opinion deserve great respect.

    But even everyday people deserve respect as well. If I happen upon some gory scene like a car accident I don't take pictures of the injured. I'll render assistance if needed or get the hell out of the way if not.

    Yes I understand the press has a right to be there. After all, I swore an oath to defend the Constitution. But with rights come responsibilities and quite often the press forgets about that. They often get the story wrong. They brush aside details because they want "the big picture" and forget that if you get all the details wrong they aren't likely to get "the big picture" right either.

    I have no doubt that some journalists are driven by an honest desire to inform the public, but I also know from my own experience that far too many are worried more about advancing their careers and all else be damned.
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

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

  3. #63
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,903
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    We always were taught that fallen members of the Armed Forces be treated with nothing but honor and respect. I extend this to fallen Law Enforcement Officers as well. These are people who gave their very lives for all of us and in my opinion deserve great respect.
    I agree.

    But this doesn't clarify anything about how taking a photograph of a situation is disrespectful or dishonorable, or why it is. It merely calls it such.
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #64
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    I agree.

    But this doesn't clarify anything about how taking a photograph of a situation is disrespectful or dishonorable, or why it is. It merely calls it such.
    That's the point I'm trying to make. A dying Marine isn't just a "situation". He's a real person. A human being. More than that he's an American Hero who died a terrible death in a terrible place. Can we not allow him the dignity of not reducing him to a mere "situation" as he lays there suffering?

    By all means tell his story and the story of all those who give their all for us. But that can be done without reducing him to a "situation" as he dies.
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

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

  5. #65
    Member Array socal2310's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Camarillo, CA
    Posts
    467
    I saw the photo. I don't think it was particularly graphic, but I think the AP made two mistakes:

    1.) Contacting the family

    and

    2.) Identifying the soldier.

    Of course the family objected. I for one, wouldn't want to know about such a photograph if it were my child. Not because I think that such photos ought not to be taken but because it was my kid.

    Ryan
    Those who will not govern their own behavior are slaves waiting for a master; one will surely find them.

  6. #66
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,903
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    That's the point I'm trying to make. A dying [person] isn't just a "situation". He's a real person. A human being.
    IMO, it all comes down to how it's handled. Agreed, it is about respect: for the situation that brought on the harm; whether the harm was unjustified; for the sacrifice made (in the case of a soldier); and for the pain endured and courage being witnessed. It is to be witness, lest the person simply be another tick-mark on a page in a book on the desk of an actuary somewhere far away. It comes down to the respect shown.

    Granted, many journalists, today, don't deserve the respect given to fleas, but ...

    The distinction I'm making is described reasonably well in the Mel Gibson film, We Were Soldiers. The reporter who stepped in a bit too deep, that day, knew he could help people understand the monstrosity of needless death, the terrible reality of war, and the degree of commitment and courage embodied in each and every person on that field. But he knew what he had to do could be helped via the right words, the right images, presented respectfully and properly.

    As to whether this AP reporter had that sort of distinction in mind or not, that's at least the ideal that has been described in response to the scathing questions sent her direction, recently. Who's to say whether she (or AP, for that matter) gets it. I do. I'd like to think some do.
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  7. #67
    VIP Member Array TN_Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shelby County TN
    Posts
    11,133
    Quote Originally Posted by V65magnafan View Post
    She says that they are lazy, egotistical, immoral, self-serving, uninformed boors, interested only in advancing their careers in any way possible, immorally if necessary--or sometimes just for fun.

    My wife and I fully support her decision.
    From someone (me) who actually works for one of the big 4 networks, let me tell you that your daughter is 100% correct in her opinion of reporters. They are all that and more.

    You should be very proud of her and supportive as well.
    ,=====o00o _
    //___l__,\____\,__
    l_--- \___l---[]lllllll[]
    (o)_)-o- (o)_)--o-)_)

  8. #68
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    The same media that argues the "significance" of this picture also drones on endlessly about the death toll of our service members. Are they suggesting that photos of a wounded soldier are SO rare that they simply couldn't pass up publishing this one?

    Step down from the broad, sweeping philosophical and constitutional b.s. arguments and explain to me why this particular photo simply had to be published against the family's wishes.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  9. #69
    Member Array Faitmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    358
    As Gates said, this isn't about what is legal or if the AP had a right, so I think we can put down those comments about Constitution and otherwise. He said it was about common decency.

    Concerning the memorials and libraries of WW1, WW2, Korean, and Vietnam, I think the thing about those is that time has happened.

    This is still pretty fresh.

    I'm still not sure how I feel about it. I vote with some that I don't need to see the picture to know the makeup of war. I don't think many in the US do. Frankly, I wish Obama would live up to his promise and pull them out. We removed the dictator. It's time for them to come home. They have done their service.

    On the other hand, when has Journalism ever been about decency? If they would stick to the truth, I would never have a problem with them. If Gates wanted control of what was published, he should change the DoD rules or not imbed the reporters anyway.

    Some of you that have served.. any patrol with imbedded reporters? Are you responsible to keep them safe? Do they make things less safe for our soldiers?
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand

    NRA Member / Ohio Conceal Carry Instructor
    CHL Holder

  10. #70
    Member Array Faitmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    +1.

    There was no way for her to know at the time she took the picture that he would later die.
    You know. That really is a good point. For all she knew, she was taking a picture of someone about to get, at the very least, a purple heart. She had no say in how or when that photo was going to be used. No reason to beat down the photographer.
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand

    NRA Member / Ohio Conceal Carry Instructor
    CHL Holder

  11. #71
    Member Array Faitmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by socal2310 View Post
    I saw the photo. I don't think it was particularly graphic, but I think the AP made two mistakes:

    1.) Contacting the family

    and

    2.) Identifying the soldier.

    Of course the family objected. I for one, wouldn't want to know about such a photograph if it were my child. Not because I think that such photos ought not to be taken but because it was my kid.

    Ryan
    You know, it's really one of those situations. Had they not said anything to the family, it would have been "they could have at least talked to the family about it before doing so. Given them some warning about what they were going to do". I've seen this type of thing time and time again. There are no winners here.
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand

    NRA Member / Ohio Conceal Carry Instructor
    CHL Holder

  12. #72
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Defensive Arms View Post
    Short memory, ay?

    You don't remember the notorious photos of the four Blackwater employees who were beaten, shot, burned and dragged through the streets of Fallujah, ending with two of them being hung upside down from a bridge?

    That was clearly an atrocity committed by the enemy, and the Associated Press disseminated those photographs worldwide, and they were featured in a lot more media outlets than Lance Corporal Bernard's photo has been:

    http://www.creditsuit.org/images/fal...ar04-afp2.jpeg


    .
    Not a short memory...as I also saw this atrocity in person.

    Now I will say that was 5 years ago...the public has a short memory. My point is--the press should show pictures of the crimes committed by the TB/AQ/other insurgent forces on the Afghan people.

    Also--if the press/AP felt this was newsworthy, how come no newspaper/television/online newspaper has published the notorious cartoons of Mohammed?? It was a one month news cycle, but "out of sensitivity to Muslims", the cartoons were never published in a mainstream outlet.

    The press is inconsistent with what is "newsworthy"--I doubt they know the definition of the word.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  13. #73
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by SIGguy229 View Post
    Now I will say that was 5 years ago...the public has a short memory. My point is--the press should show pictures of the crimes committed by the TB/AQ/other insurgent forces on the Afghan people.

    Also--if the press/AP felt this was newsworthy, how come no newspaper/television/online newspaper has published the notorious cartoons of Mohammed?? It was a one month news cycle, but "out of sensitivity to Muslims", the cartoons were never published in a mainstream outlet.

    The press is inconsistent with what is "newsworthy"--I doubt they know the definition of the word.
    The ONLY reason this immorality is occurring (publishing the picture against the wishes of the family) is because the media wants to stir up anti war sentiment. That is why we do not see the muslim atrocities against the people we are liberating.

  14. #74
    Distinguished Member Array CT-Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,510
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    The ONLY reason this immorality is occurring (publishing the picture against the wishes of the family) is because the media wants to stir up anti war sentiment. That is why we do not see the muslim atrocities against the people we are liberating.
    That is EXACTLY why I made this comment in my original post:

    "My heart goes out to LCPL Bernard's family in their time of grief. It seems to me that the editors who decided to distribute and publish this photo, against the families wishes, were either going for the sensationalistic journalism approach, trying to make a political statement about the war, or both."

    I thoroughly believe that this photo, and similar ones such as the Blackwater photo, are published to stir up anti-war sentiments amongst the folks back home.

    Why is it that photo's of all the good that is being done in Iraq and Afghanistan (such as those that have been e-mailed to me from the soldier we have 'adopted' during his deployment) do not make it into the mainstream media, but photo's of atrocities do, ie Abu Ghraib? Is it because we aren't doing any good over there? No, it is because the liberal mainstream media wants to guide public opinion in a certain direction.
    "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground."

    - Thomas Jefferson

    "I'm the arrow, you're my bow, shoot me forth and I will go"

    "Do not let any individual posts put a knot in your Big Boy Under-Roos"

  15. #75
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,808
    Damn good points you two. So much for unbiased reporting - not that we've ever seen it.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Sponsored 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 3rd, 2009, 12:41 AM
  2. T.V. Reporters and politicians with a badge...
    By HKR in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: March 15th, 2008, 09:56 PM
  3. most hated??
    By jahwarrior72 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: March 15th, 2007, 06:19 PM
  4. I hated my G2........until now.
    By clipse in forum Related Gear & Equipment
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 7th, 2006, 10:23 AM

Search tags for this page

paul-salopek

,

reporters are hated

Click on a term to search for related topics.