One of the earliest notion's of privacy was having one's image "stolen." This led to the law on the unwarranted use of one's image. Images have faces and intimacy that words can't quite offer.
In class we discussed how images can affect the reader politically and in forming views. In one of the first class periods we looked at a picture of two girls falling to ultimately their deaths (or a coma) and it was miraculously caught on film. There is an ethical issue surrounding if that image is fit for print. We also talked about the photographs of mothers picking up their children from Sandy Hook elementary school after the shooting and whether or not their grief should be displayed in that manner for public shock.
In today's age, everyone is a photographer and instagram is their paintbrush. I can relate this back to the privacy chapter in which we delved into Facebook and it's ability to recognize our face and match with social security numbers in some instances. In most circumstances we are just trying to protect our image from google and future employers, and doing all that we can to untag pictures of ourselves from the weekend.
One of my friends once asked me something I will never forget...."I wonder how many strangers photographs I am in?" When she asked this I laughed and immediately thought of trips I made with my family to the Grand Canyon or photos outside church on Easter and the people that are in the background. These were all photos that had been printed out and in our scrapbooks, now they are digital and uploaded online and become less intimate in some ways.
In our book, Goffman claims that people have territories that they have a right to control. This includes the right to personal space free from intrusion and the right to preserve one's information such as their emotions from the public. We see celebrities always having their images manipulated and skewed to fit an angle of a story. Justin Bieber has recently been portrayed as a "thug" or bad kid and the media is zooming in on that aspect. Photojournalism also is intrusive to the general public and violates Goffman's sense of self.
The line that we draw for what is an artistic photograph and what is an invasion of privacy blurs because every photo is so different and we can't make rules for photographs that haven't been taken yet.
Our book says that the line should be drawn in the newsroom and not at the scene. In class we watched a brief clip of a boy who had been hit by a car crossing the street and it showed a body (although covered) and his aunt/relative crying at the scene. News is updated so quickly now and through multimedia outlets that are giving less control of the quality of the news that is being published. I feel that I see much more apologies from stations and editors in print now then I ever have.
This subject applies to everyone, because we are all vulnerable to being photographed and having our image manipulated. Just as we are mindful in how we speak, we should be more aware of how we are behaving in public as well. It's not ideal to be under surveillance and always at risk of being used for photojournalism material but it's better to know your rights and your environment for the best outcome.
"A film is never good until the camera is an eye in the head of a poet." -Orson Wells
No comments:
Post a Comment