Stop the presses: this photograph is real

David Gazard says:

08:53am | 10/06/09

This issue has been a big problem in coverage out of the middle east. Agencies have relied on stringers who are part of the propoganda machine and manipulate images to advance their cause. Good to have your obsession with eliminating frauds.

Way Beyond Jaded says:

11:45am | 10/06/09

Michael, you are old enough to remember the days when the leading newspaper “photojournalists” in this country would routinely set up/pose pictures that would adorn page one, masquerading as “real/candid” moments. It was quite entertaining, in a squalid sort of way, to watch these often elaborate performances.

The same deception continues today, in a more subtle way. It’s the reason the endless stream of newspaper/wire photography all looks the same. It all needs to conform to well established protocols and be delivered within rigid deadlines.

It is true “Photojournalism at its best can move and educate, bring down a government and shine a light into some of the darker places in this world”, but newspaper/wire photojournalism serves an entirely different purpose. It’s required to furnish graphic commodities that correspond to the commercial precepts of newspapers (nothing too unsettling for the demographic, diverting attention away from the ads), but also visually titillating enough to justify publication.

The “truth” is an irrelevance. Photoshopping missiles or kangaroos to comply with the pre-imagined choreography is a crude, but relatively minor deception compared to the thoroughly routine drill Australian newspaper/wire photographers follow everyday.

I’d be interested to hear of any Australian newspaper/wire photography that has ‘moved and educated’ beyond the most simplistic level, ‘brought down a government’ or ‘shone a light into the some of the darker places in this world’. I can’t think of any.

Fiona says:

02:54pm | 10/06/09

Great article Mike. Gives us non-photographers something to think about.

Mike Bowers says:

02:02pm | 11/06/09

Dear way beyond jaded

Not all photography is at a Pulitzer standard and I would never
suggest otherwise, here are some examples of the photographers and
work that I was referring to

Jeff Darmanin and his documentary work following the recovery of Lauren Huxley
Kate Geraghty who followed terminally ill patient Dr John Elliott to Dignitas in Switzerland to end his life and photograph his final days
Megan Lewis and her body of work documenting the lives of the Martu people from the Great Sandy Dessert
Craig Greenhill and his incredibly brave photographs of a man being bashed by a mob in a train carriage at Cronulla
Jack Picone and his work on conflicts in Angola, Liberia and Sierra Leone
Andrew Meares news pictures during the monks uprising in Myanmar
Palani Mohans body of work documenting the plight of aids patients in The Pacific and Asia
Anything shot by david Dare Parker but especially his work in Timor
Brendan Esposito and his pictures of work undertaken by the Hollows Foundation in Vietnam
Stephen Dupont and his harrowing photographs of a suicide bombing in Afghanistan that nearly took his life.

Mike

Way Beyond Jaded says:

02:30pm | 12/06/09

Michael, I wasn’t suggesting Australian photographers can’t shoot a decent picture, I was suggesting Australian newspaper and wire service photographers are probably the most complacent of any democratic country. And indeed, much of your cited hall-of-fame work, (only three of ten shot in Australia, btw), was created outside the newspaper/wire world. Dupont hasn’t even ever worked for a paper or wire, has he?

Where’s the transcendent coverage from the past decade or more by the papers/wires of the drought? Something more than the oppressively tedious cliche of a downcast bushie standing on cracked earth?

Where’s the insightful Australian photojournalism today of the economic crisis? Something more revelatory than a suit behind a microphone where only the expression has been changed to protect the predetermined slant of the story?

Where’s the enlightening photojournalism everyday of our day-to-day banalities? Something less predicable than kiddies messing about in the season’s first snow?

Don’t get me wrong, it isn’t bad or unworthy photography, it’s just that it’s not photoJOURNALISM. To qualify for that elevated status it needs to tell a story, preferably a story we haven’t heard before or the same story that becomes a richer story, new again in the method of the telling. The vast majority of homegrown “photojournalism” routinely published in Australian newspapers doesn’t even come close. Day after day, page after page it’s the same dire dreary fabricated fluff.

None of which is of any real consequence, except it’s no wonder people dismiss a pic of a thumping big pig as a fraud when Australian “photojournalists”, charged with chronicling our adventures, are more likely to be elbowing each other out of the way to capture a confected image of Gordon Ramsey looking under siege, rather than tooling about with pig shooters in WA. If they had, people would have a greater understanding of the “real” world. They would be able to better judge what is real or questionable because they would have been better served by photojournalists.

Instead, we’re fed a constant diet of anodyne deceptions created “in-camera” rather than in Photoshop. When you wonder ‘why people make and distribute fabricated images’, I can’t help but deliver the ignoble response; because it sells newspapers.

Dallas Beaufort says:

05:08pm | 13/06/09

And file pictures with no relevance to the subject, time or place.

Andrew Taylor says:

12:32pm | 15/06/09

“Way Beyond Jaded” makes very good points, images that are truthful are what all ethical photojournalists strive for, it is obvious, and fiddling about in photoshop is only the most odious form of photographic deception. I have one thought though, who is a photojournalist?

I did work as a press photographer for many years but I was never employed as a photojournalist. Does anyone who works as an employee in the media industry officially have the title of photojournalist? (Not just on a business card but as part of an employee/employer agreement). If so I am pleased but it seems to me that photojournalist is a tag that is self designated and that is a problem. 

The rules that govern photojournalism as I understand them are indeed strict, certainly as espoused by a certain hard headed section of the Sydney photographic community. Nothing to be setup, (except its okay to set up a portrait?),  I think I understand and thankfully the days of the set up are long gone but as a true photojournalist does this mean you can’t even talk to the subject. Surely any interaction, even being there with a camera, will pollute a photojournalistic moment. I never know what photographic techniques are acceptable for the photojournalist, no flash of course but can you use long or wide lenses, should everything be shot on film and in black and white? And no time restraints, spend as long as you like to get the image and suffer, a good photojournalist must at least appear to suffer for the image. Sorry, I lost it for a moment.

Newspaper and wire agency photographers have a responsibility to those that employ them to provide, not graphic commodities, but decent images from their assignments. “Jaded” is absolutely right when he says “truth” is what photojournalism must strive for but news photography can also be truthful and be excellent. “Jaded” must be very jaded with comments like “deception continues”, “commercial precepts”, “truth is an irrelevance” and what evidence is there to justify, “Australian newspaper and wire service photographers are probably the most complacent of any democratic country”? I don’t believe any of this.

If anybody doesn’t know I have worked with Michael Bowers for more than sixteen years.

still Way Beyond Jaded says:

06:38pm | 15/06/09

Andrew, just for the record, I’m pretty sure I wrote “complaisant” and it was subbed into “complacent” by The Punch. What I meant to say was that of all the vibrant, dynamic Western democracies, Australian newspaper and wire photographers (or photojournalists, press photographers, news photographers - call them what you will) seem to lead the world in churning out the least incisive work.

Let’s pick a paper and date at random and test this. The Daily Telegraph and 15 June 2009 sound pretty random, so let’s see;

A story about tuck shop food and the pic shows four schoolkids sitting on a bench set against a brick wall eating their lunch. Each of the children has an arm aloft holding food and are all looking at each other centring on middle frame. I can only think the photographer was incredibly patient or extraordinarily lucky to stumble across such a perfectly poised image. If that’s not a set up, I’ll eat my tripod.

A pic of NSW treasurer’s kids clambering all over him in his office. If that’s not at least partially set up, I’ll eat your tripod.

Story about traffic changes to Syd.Airport illustrated with a flash lit pic of man holding a child both casting a curiously studied glance toward the terminal leaning on car window from which a little dog peeks out. If I were feeling charitable I’d guess the photographer noticed this scene, but rather than chancing shooting the actual scene, took the expedient option of setting it up.

Uncredited pic of babes wearing one piece swimsuits - story about upcoming exhibition. Apart from a caption describing the image as “modern swimwear” there’s nothing terribly informative about it. I’m sure no one needs me to state there’s zero journalism in this photo. And rather tepid titillation value too - should any desperate individuals feel compelled to seek it out.

Two uncredited pix of detained miscreants being tended to by police after being sprayed with capsicum spray. At last, real photoJOURNALISM! Pity it’s a story of negligible news value and this “photojurnalism” only merits publication because of its “sensationalism”.

Okay, so we’re only talking about the Bogan’s Bible here, but the ostensibly classier broadsheets publish the same vacant product hidden under a veneer of artistic pretension.

I think I’ve described every “news” pic in today’s Tele. I have learned precisely nothing from that “photojournalism” [“truth is an irrelevance”]. I boldly claim at least two of them are blatant “deceptions” [“deception continues”]. I can only speculate the photographers produce these trifles to keep their bosses happy [“commercial precepts”]. I can’t help but wonder why the newspapers of countries of similar economies, cultures etc, consistantly publish ethical, compelling photojournalism by photographers of no greater talent than locals.

I can only draw the conclusion that “Australian newspaper and wire service photographers are probably the most complaisant of any democratic country”.

Mark Smith says:

09:19am | 20/06/09

Hmmmm…This is something that is close to my heart given that I’ve dragged a camera around for nearly 30 years trying to inform and entertain while not going mad.

“Jaded” does highlight some interesting aspects of what is used as illustrations by the Telegraph. As one who has taken a thousand of those types of pictures I felt a bit of perspective is required.

It would be so nice to spend our days on the front line of some huge news story, Leica in one hand, ravishingly attractive female journalist in the other. The smell of developer mixed with the rancid smell of burning tyres outside the hotel as you hand process Tri X before printing the still wet neg and racing off to the Rueters office to send…Ahhhh what a life!

Now the reality. We live in Australia. Nice place Australia. Very quiet most of the time. Yes occasionally some pretty decent stories break and when that happens the troops get some pretty good snaps…Kerang train disaster, Thredbo, the bushfires…Covered all of them.

The rest of the time your average photog is illustrating stories…Trying to get something eye catching in the 20 minutes he has to shoot what will be one of four or five jobs in a day.  You want to make it eye catching so the punter see’s the pic, reads the story and notices the add for furniture at the bottom of the page.

There is a hell of a lot of pretentious naval gazing amongst “photojournalists”..The coffee club as I call them. They spend a lot of time taking pictures that appeal to other photographers without necessarily producing something that is terribly informative, eye catching or accessible to a wider audience of so called “bogans”

Then again having been a picture editor as well and having to trawl the wire desks throughout the day I’m here to tell you good quality spontaneous pics are very thin on the ground from all over the world.
My job isn’t to teach photography..I’m not trying to educate the public about whats good or bad. A great animal pic makes people smile..A gutsy sick kid beating the odds inspires. Sure they are both “set up” but so what.
We are not complaisant…Just realistic about what we can and can’t get and who is ultimately going to look at it.

glory francis says:

11:37am | 22/06/09

You can all try and out I’m the biggest and best photogragher ever ride,but the truth is go to Darwin museum,see sweetheart the real giant crocodile and swallow your unbelieving tougues,In Currumbin 30 odd years ago a croc shooter there by the name of China Jim bought in a croc on to the beach there, bigger than sweetheart,we unfortunately who were privledged to see this terrifying sized reptile didn’t have any camera’s nor were there any photograghers of graphic size about either,however some one may have took a photo and remember the event.

stephen says:

12:39pm | 22/06/09

If the picture’s bulls&^t, then who’s writing the story?

BB says:

09:18am | 01/07/09

Well said stephen

Robbie says:

01:20pm | 01/07/09

Quick call MediaWatch!

GH says:

02:35pm | 01/07/09

The shark piccie is about 5 years old and it is a digital enhanced image