Greetings again,
This week's post is a bit early because it requires you to work through a slideshow and short video and I'm not sure how long that may take some of you with more challenging bandwidth. I managed to view it all (including loadtime) in less than 15 minutes, so I think it's do-able. Read the text, view the photos and the video. Think not so much about the photographer's message about the acceptance of the iPhone as a legitimate tool, but about the purpose of photojournalism. Do you think it's a positive thing? An invasion of privacy? A waste of time? How about this particular story? I can easily see people in More Economically Developed Countries looking at the photos on their iPhones while eating McDonald's fries and cruising around in their BMWs as they email their favorite photo to a friend's phone. So, what do you think? Is there a point to this? Or is it just sensationalism or art?
Due: Wednesday, 29AUG
Here's the link:iPhone in Congo
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePhoto journalism seems like such a great way to share news. “Pictures say a thousand words” which is totally true. Many reporters and journalists simply write all their information out in a long paper. It could be just me, but I’d much rather read less and actually be able to see what they are talking about. Pictures explain things better than anyone ever can with words. Also despite the short description he writes about each picture, the pictures aren’t biased, they show what’s there. The only way to be biased with pictures is if you only show pictures that show a negative view on the topic, but even those are true situations and places. Even pictures that have been Photoshoped don’t seem any worse (in my opinion) than propaganda in the written world.
DeleteCountries like Congo may consider photo journalism an invasion of privacy, but I would much rather have the truth spread around the world than nothing, or lies. Photo journalism is not at all a waste of time. It is such a good way to show and explain what the journalist is talking about. I wouldn’t call it sensationalism. But it is an art form, and with all art it shows the artists personality. His pictures are only his view of the story, but the difference between this type of journalism is that we can understand his view of the topic better. He took a picture of the teenage rape victim because that is an important part of this story in his mind. Using pictures does not take away the ability to pour your thoughts into your work; they just make what you say clearer.
I really like how photo journalism helps to explain the stories better than what he could have done with only words. I hope to see more photo journalism in the future; the experience is more of a journey rather than an examination of someone’s research paper.
Concerning the African continent, photojournalism can be viewed from different aspects. It can be a positive view if the people viewing the pictures are educated about the subject, however, if they aren’t, this can cause false assumptions and negative views towards Africa. I don’t believe that it’s an invasion of privacy or a waste of time because the atrocities and problems that occur in the DRC for example shouldn’t be kept a secret. The only way things would be able to change is if people are informed about it. In this particular story, the way Michael Christopher Brown explains the reasons why he uses his iPhone to take pictures for journalism purposes makes sense. He is sharing the realities that happen in some areas in the DRC with the rest of the world without bringing too much attention to himself which allows him to reflect and to personally think of what all of it means to him. Using his pictures and videos, solutions can be made to change these issues.
ReplyDeletePeople in More Economically Developed Countries who view these pictures, for example, are most of the time uneducated about this topic, or even the African continent. To them, they believe all of the African stereotypes such as Africa only being made up of primitive tribes, Africa having no literary, philosophical, or historical traditions, and Africa being a jungle with no civilization consisting of only corruption and conflict. Focusing mainly on this article, these people could infer that Africa is underdeveloped not knowing that this part of Africa has been through so much and that they are still recovering from wars that have haunted their past. People in economically developed countries compare their “perfect” lives to the lives of people who have been through numerous wars thinking that that’s their lifestyle. They are wrong.
The whole point of this article however, was not to mislead people but to inform them. On top of that, people should start educating themselves on the positive views on Africa by learning that Africa is not a jungle, Africa is definitely not primitive, but that these atrocities that occur are real. These images, especially,that Michael Christopher Brown has shared are like art containing vivid and descriptive realities that send a message. I don’t believe that it shows sensationalism since these occurrences are actual and not exaggerated. As a whole, this article was to inform the world of what is going on in one of the most unique continents, however, to those who are uneducated about it, it causes them to view Africa from a completely erroneous aspect.
Photojournalism plays a vital role in society today. A statement is made to the outside world through photojournalism. Michael Christopher Brown decided to raise awareness based on the political/economic instability that many countries, the DRC in particular, currently face. There are many news channels that are biased which are often used as a tool to indoctrinate the masses creating tensions and conflicts. Hence the powerful/moving pictures that are taken by photojournalists are important in ways such that people can have their own interpretation of what’s going on in the outside world.
DeleteIt’s important for everyone to be aware of it. I don’t believe taking pictures of people who have been living in a war zone, isolated from their family, and being gang-raped is something that should be concealed from the public, this sort of trouble should be exposed! Do I think broadcasting this sort of cause/problem is a waste of time? Of course not! If it weren’t for these photojournalists, no one would ever know about the deep issues people face today. Everyone deserves to know that a lot of the natural resources that the DRC has are being used to “help fund the warfare, atrocities and repression that have afflicted the area for more than a century.” The majority of us, don’t take into account and spend a moment to appreciate the harsh labor conditions (in search of cassiterite, coltan and tourmaline, which are highly cancerous minerals.) that are experienced by the locals in eastern Congo everyday just to satisfy our needs and wants of having phones, computers, iPods, etc.
For instance, people in more economically developed countries have their own image of Africa, which is not quite accurate. This just shows their ignorance. It is true that the African continent is still undergoing issues with corruption education, and poverty but if it weren’t for the “primitive” people in the DRC they wouldn’t have any source of technology. Therefore the use of pictures is the only common language that is shared between our diverse worlds. People just need to dig deeper into the picture and analyze the problems faced with the image.
Alina,
DeleteOkay, so we see the harsh labor conditions that go into mining the natural resources for our smart phones and flat screen TVs. So what? Brown even discusses the fact that he used his smart phone to take the photos. Obviously, we are not going to stop using these items. In fact, he has to exploit them more in order to get the phone/camera to take the picture of them being exploited. I agree that the photos are a "common language" but to what purpose?
The goal of journalism is to convey reality as accurately as possible in order to raise awareness throughout the world of problems that are being neglected and ways to solve them. Similarly, photojournalism, often called “documentary photography” offers a form of news that lets the public experience the event visually and this is exactly what Michael Christopher Brown has done in D.R.C and other parts of Africa.
ReplyDeleteI personally view photojournalism in a positive way as it aids viewers in better understanding the different problems occurring in different parts of the world such as Africa, which till today, is viewed in the most negative way possible. In his story, he was able to capture reality in Africa with just an IPhone. He didn't need an excessive amount of equipment that a photographer would normally use but instead a simple IPhone, which is what I believe, the right thing. To him, it was all about focusing on the situation and brutalities that occur in Congo. He realized that the problems in Congo were far more complicated and harsh than what we see on the news everyday. This led him to publishing his photos in order to inform others and solve the issues taking place in Africa.
Photojournalism is certainly not a waste of time or an invasion of privacy since it enhances knowledge and assists those who are ignorant of what is happening in places other than the country they live in. This is especially common amongst North Americans and Europeans living in more economically developed countries. They have developed myths about Africa due to their enslavement of Africans, their colonization of Africa, and their history of racism. These myths have degraded African experience and created stereotypes of Africans and their history such as Africa being a country, or a jungle, or a continent filled with poverty, slavery, violence, and plenty of other negative things. This is mainly because people are ignorant and uneducated of what is really happening in Africa. People need to open up their mind and see what really is happening other than making false assumptions. Yes, several countries in Africa may be experiencing poverty, slavery, and violence, but that is somewhat due to the slave trade, their colonization, and past wars. Brown’s photographs can be viewed as expressive and vivid art captured to send a message to all those who are uneducated on this topic and need to be informed of such cruelties and false myths. For this reason, I do not look at Brown’s images as sensationalism since his photographs are not exaggerated at all and simply illustrate the truth while trying to raise awareness on problems that are taking place in Congo. I’m hoping this encourages more people to put their myths aside and come to learn about Africa and what is really happening here.
Photojournalism, the art or practice of communicating news by photographs is a positive action if you ask me. It’s an excellent way to build awareness of what happens around the world. Its also positive in the sense that, I’m more likely to believe a picture rather than random information given to me. Pictures, I believe are generally more accurate than written texts.
ReplyDeletePhotojournalism can be an invasion of privacy. For instance, people don’t always want others to see what their country is like. I think that before taking pictures of country like Congo, the Congolese need to accept that their country is corrupt. I was once taking pictures with my camera here in Congo and the Police stopped me. I was told that they don’t want foreigners to take pictures of their country and go show it around the world. Taking such pictures is not a waste of time. Photojournalists take pictures for a living. They take pictures to share news. If photojournalists were restricted from picture taking, then people would be unaware of things happening around the world.
People in more Economically developed countries are considered to be ignorant because they have no clue about Africa. Photojournalism in this case is ideal for those kinds of people. It’s a chance to learn about Africa through pictures. These people shouldn’t jus look at pictures to see what Africa is like, but rather to understand. Photojournalism is the spread of news through pictures! People to need to embrace the fact that they are able to see pictures of thing happening elsewhere rather than having to physically go to the place.
Photojournalism in a way is sensationalism. It’s like gossip. People love to talk about what’s happening around the world. People see or hear something and they just have the need to tell others. Overall I believe photojournalism is a good step to ameliorating and aiding countries that need outside (other countries) help.
Photojournalism has its positive and negative effects on people but it doesn’t mean it is sensationalism. Photojournalism is a great way to create awareness around the world and allows people to explore the world in a much larger scope. Many people around the world have a complete different perception about the African continent and the only way things would be able to change is if people are informed about it. Brown’s idea of to raise awareness based on the supporting/ financial instability that many countries, the DRC in particular are facing. In his photojournalism, he was able to confine the reality in DRC with just an i-Phone. He didn't use an unnecessary tools or machinery, which proves that knowing much a country does not require high skilled people or tool. I believe everyone has the right to cope up with what’s going on in different parts of the world. The issue that photojournalism brings up is “invasion of privacy”. Does it really invade ones privacy? I don’t think so. From my perspective it increases a person acquaintance about what the world is really undergoing.
ReplyDeletePeople in Advanced Economic countries view these images completely different because most of them are uneducated about the African continent and are less aware about it. In this case photojournalism does not mislead people but it just gives them a larger and vibrant picture of how the world is. People who aren’t aware of such situations or issues need to step out of their “ideal countries” and explore what the world has for them. Photojournalism actually changes the way people think about certain countries and it educates them in a much better way. It brings a whole new aspect and shares deep realities of various countries. Michael Christopher Brown’s videos and pictures just prove his points clearly and contain no exaggeration or a personal judgment. People should consider photojournalism as an immense approach to crab in information. Not only does it give information but also aware people about the realities of the less developed or unstable economies
Journalism in general makes the world smaller and photojournalism just makes news more realistic. Sometimes words might lie but pictures never lie. Articles are meant to be for people who are literate what about the illeterate ones? Well that is where photos come into play it gives them a good enough idea of what's actually going on. Therefore photojouranlism is a indeed a postive thing and certainly not a waste of time. Also it is not the invasion of privacy especially not in congo situation. And since people in economically developed countries are more technology based, especailly teenagers the use of iphone to take pictures appeals to all and is a quick way to spread the message around.
ReplyDeletePhotojouranlism is a postive thing because it brings out the truth to people. The Democratic Republic of Congo is obviously a democartic country. In a democracy it is the right of the people to know what's going on and there is no better way of being aware than looking at pictures. And all that jouranlists try to do is bring the truth out and here I disregard their exaggeration because that's another topic. If someone wants to hide something, or doesn't want it to be public worldwide that means something is wrong and that is why it is not invading privacy rather bringing the discrete out to the people. I think iphone in congo is interesting because when someone says photojouranlism to me I automatically think professional cameras but Michael Christopher has or can in a way revolutionalise photojouranlism. Honestly if I was photojournalist I would hate to carry a camera twice the size of my bag and run around to take pictures. An iphone seems sufficient because it is small, easily portabele, and not very noticeable. I don't think anything else could help photojouranlism more.A very imporatant fact that Michael brings out is that people want to see reality, pictures and they care least about the variuos technicalites of a good picture and therefore a normal camera is suffiecent and efficient. Also it is true how peoples lives depend on mines. Not only the miners get benefit but also the people not in the mine fields get benefits. Michael did a very good job of using an iphone to shoot pictures they honestly to me look like pictures shot from a professional camera.
Indeed yes iphones are very useful and may revolutionize the whole photojournalism industry. It also appeals to people of all sorts sonce it is the age of techonolgy more specifically the age of apple, people are more easily accessible to that then watching TV and watching the news. So therefore photojouranlism is a postive thing and it brings out the truth to everyone. It makes the world smaller!
Journalism aims to report and announce events and issues to the broad audience. Although, it is the "words" in the article which describe the issue and provide information to people, I would say photos can also have a message. It is true that visuals are usually more appealing to people than the written words do. Since photos, most of the times convey truth and reality in the world, it is a very useful tool to use in news articles, which always tries to disclose issues accurately. However, I disagree with that the photos could be more accurate than the words do, since photos can be interpreted differently by people too. I think photojournalism is very effective way of communication, if it is used in a right way.
ReplyDeleteI consider iPhones to take pictures is very innovative idea. Photojournalism does not state that the photos should be taken by any kind of digital cameras or high definition camcorders- it is just the way of communicating with photos. While iPhone is very portable and also has high quality in pictures- why not use iPhone? Taking pictures in DRC may be considered invasion in privacy, since they do not want to reveal somethings, but it is more important to spread the problems and acknowledge the truth. In this article, by using iPhone, Michael tries to show the reality of Congo: how people work in mines and how it affects them. If his iPhone can capture the moment and if that photo has strong message just as the written words would have, using both to write an article would be perfect. Therefore, photojournalism should never be considered wasting time but an effective way of spreading issues.
However, one thing that I think that people should be careful using photojournalism is that photo is not as powerful and as reliable as the written words are. While written words directly explains the issue, photos can be interpreted differently by different individuals if there aren’t any words describing it. Photojournalism should only be used in support of an article, rather than by itself.
Interesting comment about the fact that words are usually more specific than photos. Most of the others think the photos are more reliable and easy to identify. Hmmm.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePhotojournalism - A type of journalism that uses images or pictures to portray a type of story, more like a news related story. Their main objective is to have and fair and exact image of an event they illustrate. The lighter the camera the better it is for photographers. It would be very hard for photojournalists to move around with a professional camera, lights, and the different lenses they use. It’s a lot of hard work and not everyone would be comfortable. People might have problems in taking a picture, maybe they would feel uncomfortable so, the lighter and smaller the camera the better.
ReplyDeletePictures demonstrate and give a clear view of the idea or event that has taken place. Pictures speak a lot more than words do but, people look at thing in different prospective and people can be mislead. Photojournalism is not an invasion of privacy (in my opinion) but it can be for other people. Maybe underdeveloped countries like Africa or parts of Asia can find it as an invasion of privacy because they are not that educated or have any kind of knowledge about what’s going on around the world. I prefer Camera phones, as Michel Christopher Brown said it makes him invisible in a crowd. And I feel the media play a vital role in everyone’s life. People make a judgment in what they see so, whatever the media illustrates to people they tend to believe it. But sometimes they show the negative side of the aspect and not the positive side. Or they show the positive side and not the negative side. Example – Africa is always seen in a bad view. Africa has its bright side too why not show that but no, their always showing the negative side of it.
No, I feel photojournalism is not a waste of time. People should be aware of what’s going on around are world. They should step out, out of their zone and try to understand about what’s happening around them. Photojournalism is a way of spreading awareness. It is the easiest and the best way and it’s accessible to everyone.
Photojournalism is one of many ways used for entertainment, to visualize information as well as inform. It is used and translated both in good and bad ways, I think just like humor it is cultural and very time based in the sense that I may not translate a picture the same way you or an older person would. In that way, it has its own disadvantages, just because there are no words to describe or explain what the artist behind it was trying to portray, but that is exactly what makes photojournalism an art form. Photos have way of drawing or attracting people and giving a certain message depending on the audience.
ReplyDeleteIn this case I think that the iPhone came in very handy or was very useful in the sense that he was able to create his art and not be noticed. My interpretation of his work might be different from yours but I think he was being informative in two different ways, he was showing the way miners mine in eastern Congo as well as also show how using just a simple electronic device made him able to collect information and pictures without being noticed. One or the other could have been the main message of the article, but that also depends on the audience who is looking through the slide show and video. This can be bad publicity for Africa as a whole to the western world because of the ignorance as well as the perspective they would be looking at the article in, considering that this is a third world country.
Many more issues can be brought to the people in this way in the future as well because more and more people each day depend on technology, if news and information is brought to them in a creative and artistic way, more issues and events can be put out there faster. Knowing the audience you would like the information to attract is very important and can help eliminate the factor of misinterpretation.
Very specific point about both the POV making a difference to interpretation and the fact that the use of technology is only getting more and more popular.
DeleteI do not think that photojournalism is something negative, but it depends of countries. In Western countries medias are part of the daily life, but in Africa it's a whole different story. Photojournalism can be sometimes an invasion of privacy; paparazzi are a great example. In Africa medias struggle a lot. Many African countries do not allow journalist to express themselves; some journalist even need to run away from their countries.
ReplyDeleteI would not say that photojournalism is a waste of time. Nowadays we do not need to make long article with a picture, the picture says it all.This particular story is really interesting. We all know that the situation there in Congo is dangerous these days, so just a picture and few comments are sufficient. A Picture can be described in several ways, so it is up to us to describe the way we want it.
I like the fact that a photo tells everything, we barely need words with pictures now. We should let the African media have a kind of freedom of expression and establish rules for western countries against paparazzi for example.
so do you see Brown as a foreign paparazzi? Were his photos invading privacy? What sort of "rules" are you talking about? You are right about photos telling a story that sometimes words just do not. For example, I cannot have a conversation with someone who does not speak English, but we can both appreciate and respond to the same photo equally.
DeletePhoto journalism is a particular form of journalism (the collecting, editing, and presenting of news material for publication or broadcast) that creates images in order to tell a news story. It is now usually understood to refer only to still images, but in some cases the term also refers to video used in broadcast journalism(Wikipedia). Photojournalism is interesting and it is one of the way that news is tranfered all over the world. From one cornor to another of the world people use their phones and post photos highlighting events happening in the world.
ReplyDeleteNow I did hear about the conflicts in eastern DRC.A split within the National Congress for the People’s Defense (CNDP) rebel group, formerly led by Laurent Nkunda, and a joint Rwandan-Congolese military offensive against the Rwandan rebel group Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), have further blurred the lines between the warring parties (doctorswithoutborders.org). In this specific case photojournalism would be the best idea. The tension is rising as the conflict spreads and people wouldn't like someone to come and take pictures while people are in pain. Haveing mobile phones like an iphone could help people would not think that a person holding an iphone ,or anyother phone capable of taking picture, is taking pictures.
I don't think photojournalism does any harm I think its a really good idea. A reason would be that people have the right to know what is happening around the world. Like if something happened in Kinshasa and I am out traveling I would like to know what's happening. Everyonee probably heard about the not quiet recent blasts in brazaville(I think it happened last school year). I was right infront of the blast i could see the air pressure as it pushed towards the building i live in. Alot of people were asking questiopns the next day, who were on vacations, if it was real or not. I had my iphone and i had taken some picture and I snt it to them also I emailed them to a local guy I know here at a news channel and he showed them on his channel. So photojournalism would not hurt anything.
You bring up a new point with the "safety" issue. The thing with that, as I see it, is that in order for it (the published photos) to be helpful, the people "out and about" must also have instant access to the posts. I have seen this instant posting in things like a fight in a high school (lt hits YouTube before some administrators know about it), The Rodney King videos (on the news before the police had a chance to "cover their tracks" were another example of 'good safety."
DeleteWhat about the negative? Wiki leaks or national security that goes viral before the officials know about it. Is this a danger?
Photojournalism like other forms of journalism, is meant to deliver information to a broad audience. For that reason, I feel that photojournalism is a positive thing, as it informs us of our surrounding.
ReplyDeleteMost people around the world ,in the US for example, might not see how they affect the Congo or how the Congo affects them. The reality is that the electronics industry seeks minerals such as tourmaline, cassiterite and coltan, all of which can be found in the Congo. Sadly the exploitation of minerals in the Congo to fund warfare has negatively affected people in the area.Naturally, there have been estimates on the number of people affected by warfare in the area, but the journalist's pictures taken from a phone, rather then a professional camera,was able to give a face to the people affected.Thus,succeeding in showing us what we really pay to own a phone.
When it comes to privacy, I have lived in developing countries for most of my life and I do have trouble taking pictures. Often times, the police ,or even locals ask for payment for permission to take a photo that is not even on their land (something I do find rather inconvenient). So the idea of just using your phone to capture and document events ,other than birthdays,in a way no to draw attention is appealing to me.As it shows the advancement of media in the way that with internet access you can easily upload pictures to the internet and also that you no longer have to own an expensive Nikon to take powerful pictures, you can simply own a phone (with a camera,obviously).
The people however, whether they are in a war zone or not, do have a right to refuse to be taken a photo of.Denying them that right, I feel is an invasion of privacy. Though the idea of privacy has been blurred in recent years due to new technology and the media,which has created problems in countries like Great Britain with an increase in stalking paparazzi.
Media varies from country to country,and to most Westerners "free media" seems like the ideal. But, to some countries in Africa, like Kenya that has been relatively peaceful for years,has seen a fall in tourism,because of bad media, and are trying to show the world a more positive side of their country to attract investors and further develop their country. In situations like those, I do understand how photojournalism may pose as a threat and could hinder the efforts of developing countries.
All in all, I think it is great. As vivid language can paint you a picture of what is going on, but an actual picture,taken from a phone you possibly might own. Gives us as people another way to communicate and share information from all over the world,by a simple click of a button on our iPhone's.
So, taking the photos and not telling people you are taking them you think is acceptable, but if people object to the camera, it's not? How can someone object if he doesn't know the photo is being taken? Do you think thist use of photos taken with a cell phone, explicitly showing abuse of humanity in order to obtain the raw materials for said cell phone, has a political or moral confusion?
DeletePhotojournalism is one of the fundamental tools in today’s world, and it is tremendously significant in conveying social issues to the public. In this case, the images shown by Christopher brown, of the DRC expresses the violence and other important things that are going on. The majority of people have no or little clue about the violence that is happening today in the rest of world so I definitely do not think it a waste of time. Michael Christopher brown did not meant no invade anyone’s’ privacy, because he did not personally attack anyone but he did meant to share these Images with the rest of the world. Photojournalism is not a bad thing or sensationalism if it provides ingenuous information to contribute to peoples’ knowledge. The sad part about photojournalism of a country in Africa or Africa itself is that, it confirms other people’s stereotypes and ignorance. However, it should not reinforce negative perception but rather grab peoples’ awareness in order to help them change their conceptions. Other developed countries should use their great eyes and minds in order to analyze what they see in the images and therefore learn more about them. It is very important to be aware of the information that we know of. Photojournalism is a positive thing because it actually helps the ones that look at know about the important details that are left out. People in economically developed countries need to make the big difference that exists between them and underdeveloped countries. This means that they should take what they see in the video and on the pictures in consideration, and expand their views of ‘’ the outside world’’ so called underdeveloped. The truth is it really helps to be aware the situations others are going through. In addition, being ahead of others also means being fully aware of everything else. ‘’ Do not live in a box even after seeing such videos and pictures from your I-phones.
ReplyDeleteWhat would you suggest people do to avoid living in a box? Even Brown clearly states that he knows the MEDC will not give up their electronic devices even if they realize that the miners in Congo have all or most of their international human rights violated in securing the raw materials to support these devices.
Delete
DeletePhotojournalism which kind of involves of “capturing images to help tell a story” is a positive thing to me. People should be aware of what is happening anywhere on earth, and if you asked me, I think it is more interesting to have to look at a picture instead of only words that explain an event. Plus a picture would be a proof that something actually happened. But I also think that a picture without any explanations could not often be well interpreted by people.
Photojournalism may be an invasion of privacy in only certain cases; for instance, in Africa many places would not allow any journalists trying to take pictures or to inform themselves.
That is why I think that Michael Christopher’s idea of taking pictures only with his iPhone was bright; an iPhone can take pictures as almost accurate as a regular digital camera, and can as well take them really fast, which made him more discreet.
Some people outside of Africa still live in the past and do not know exactly what is going on there. Some of them just didn’t try to know much about Africa and think that this continent has not developed yet. So I think the point of this was to inform these people outside of Africa about its real situations.
Why inform people outside of Africa? To what end? Would it be more complete journalism if the images did include captions? Interestingly, about 1/2 of you say photos are stronger and 1/2 say images are stronger. But almost everyone says they should work in tandem.
DeletePhotojournalism is a great way of sharing information. It focuses on image to tell a story. I am that kind of person who will rather look at pictures then read long articles. I agree with the fact that pictures explain more than words. I understand better by looking at pictures because I can easily see what a journalist is talking about. Photos attract people to look at them more than longs sentences to read.
ReplyDeletePhotojournalism has both negatives and positives aspects. It’s a positive thing because it brings out the truth; it shows us what local media can’t show us to save their life. But by using his phone, I consider what Michael Christopher Brown did as an invasion of privacy. Most of the people who are on the pictures didn’t know that he was taking pictures. Photojournalism is not a waste of time because it shows us the reality of the world, how life is in small cities. It is also negative because everyone can interpret a picture how he wants. If someone doesn’t really know the story about Africa or anywhere else, he can only interpret it in a wrong way. We can’t be sure about picture because they can also be photoshoped to make situations look worse sometimes or good. It can be both sensationalism and art. It is art when you can feel and understand what the journalist he’s showing or what he’s trying to explain. I consider it art when it’s all true. But some journalists use it to increase their readership. Photojournalism is important because one picture can be worth than a thousand of words and it shows the real life in some countries.
Doris, you touch on two new topics: privacy and yellow journalism. You can develop your points more by elaborating with evidence (specific examples, etc), instead of devoting just one sentence to each idea. Otherwise, your points are solid and original. Do you think that any photos (or all photos) should have the permission of the subject before they are published? This is a very gray area in photojournalism. Where is the line between a cutting edge story and a photo essay that is more of a human interest story? Is it wrong to hide the camera (as in the case of using a phone that no one knows is a camera?)
Delete