I want to revisit this. If you’ve studied journalism you’ve probably seen the above photo and know where I’m going with this. If not, here’s your hypothetical for the day.
Kevin Carter, a South African photojournalist, took this photo during famine in Sudan in 1993. The starving child collapsed attempting to reach a food center as a vulture waits for the child’s death. According to Carter, he waited nearly 20 minutes hoping the vulture would fly away. It did not. He took the photo before chasing it away.
Carter came under intense denigration because he didn’t help the child. Many people wondered if the child had survived in such a weak state. The photo, which was sold to the New York Times, got heaps of mail and ran a special stating the child had enough strength to escape the vulture, though the definitive fate was unknown.
Carter received the Pulitzer Prize for the photo in 1994. He later committed suicide.
Try to envision yourself in that situation: Is it your moral obligation to help the child? Is being on assignment all that matters? Where is the line between work responsibility and human responsibility? Was chasing the vulture away enough in terms of ethical duty? Did Carter simply seize the moment?
Every journalist wants the Pulitzer.
Would you take the photo?
I would take the photo and then help the child. I admit that its not completely ethical to take the photo in the first place (exploiting others pain to begin with), but there's no way I would leave the child without helping. You've got the photo, you've done your job, now tend to your duty to society.
ReplyDeleteWow this is really something. I honestly don't think I would have taken the photo. Even though it would be "good" (For the assignment given) But I wouldn't be able to do it. An innocent life is far more important than an award. I am interested in journalism but not enough to wait and watch someone's life vanish in front of me.
ReplyDelete