Visual Editors
Visual Editors, NFP was incorporated as a 501(c)(3) non-profit in 2004.
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Josh Awtry
VizEds Moderator
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 375
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posted:
Tue Dec 28, 2004 7:28 pm
|
|
| |
The Salt Lake Tribune, like a lot of other papers, has a not-quite-written-down code against running death in the paper. After a long discussion yesterday, I won one and was able to run -- even if it was very muted -- an image with bodies in it. (We were in the company of the KC Star and a few others, I noticed today.) The photo was of a woman crying over a mass grave. If you looked carefully, you could see feet and a face or two in the background.
My argument: There's death, and then there's gore. Is it worse to see a living, screaming person with a missing limb and blood gushing out, or a foot of someone you know is dead? To zero in specifically, this is a story about the immense amount of human death... not to show it seems dodgy at best.
I didn't get the guideline removed from our institutional memory, but I'm happy that we showed we could bend our internal rules when journalism dictates. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
mhowie
Juke Box Hero
Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 43
Location: The Gazette, Schenectady, N.Y.
Posted:
Tue Dec 28, 2004 9:35 pm
|
|
|
| |
On the first day, I ran a nice shot of a woman bending over the bodies of her two dead children. I ran it small and downpage. My ME said it was well played, but I heard at least one complaint the next day from a reader because I used dead bodies at all.
On the second day, I ran a shot of a mess, a debris-strewn city shot, with a grieving woman on the jump -- I wanted to use another shot with a dead child, because it was the best shot I found that day, but I was shot down this time.
I usually keep dead people out of the paper, certainly off of 1A, but sometimes, I think they're justified to convey the impact of the story. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
scottk
Contributing editor
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 116
Location: Chicago Tribune RedEye
Posted:
Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:08 am
|
|
|
| |
Newspapers should always be thinking about designing for readers and working hard to provide readers with the true story. While I am sympathetic and understand that not every reader wants to see dead bodies while reading over breakfast, I also firmly believe that stories like this require photos that not everyone wants to see. These photos represent what has happened and no amount of hiding and editing can change that.
Of course, always do it as humanely as possible, but the one thing a newspaper can't do is toss aside a photo JUST because it shows a dead body. Show the photo for what it is and let the rest fall into place.
When you are faced with a tragedy of unprecedented proportions, one where upwards of 100,000 people are dead, there is just no way to tell the story accurately without the very photos that some readers are against. I like to believe that the average reader is smart and savvy enough to understand that this kind of story is one that you can't design around.
And like I felt when I was designing pages shortly after 9/11, what I see turns my stomach. It's hard to see all of this, but that's why we're here. Ultimately, readers expect us to tell them the truth. There's no sugar coating this story. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Previous topic
Next topic
