Ethics and photojournalism, or, "How Jill Greenberg Imploded Her Career By Being A F*cking Idiot"
When I read about things like this, I get a little angry inside. OK, I’m furious right now. Here WE all are. And all of US are trying our damnedest to convince People there is no liberal or conservative bias in the media.
And please, believe me when I say that. There is a bias, sure, but it’s to the story. If it’s the eve of John McCain’s speech accepting the GOP nomination and Biden goes off the hook and punches a photographer in the face, who do you think is going to gete the lede story? Boring speech everyone knows was going to happen, or bloody-nosed shooter with whacky, maybe-crazy vice presidential candidate? That one there’s a no-brainer, yessir.
So when photographers admit to tricking their subjects — whom they were hired to shoot by a respectable (perhaps the — rhymes with tree — respectible) magazine — into having a picture taken looking like a horror movie still, and then go into Photoshop and spray some pink lipstick on him and write a cheeky slogan over his head, and then take another photo and add shark teeth and blood where his mouth was, and then take another photo, and put a monkey over him, and add some poop that looks like a third-grader drew it, and then say:
“Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”
That’s Busch-league SHIT, Jill Greenberg. And I know I’m not the only one thinking you will never again grace the cover of any respectible magazine for what you did. You are the Jayson Blair of photojournalism right now, and the worst part is you don’t think you did anything wrong.
PDN Pulse interviewed Greenberg, where she admits to deceiving the senator
“He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.
Yeah, go figure, a senator’s handlers don’t know shit about professional studio photographer lighting. This is like reading the recount of a kid who laid a trap for his older sister.
Says Jeffrey Goldberg, the story’s author:
“I don’t know Greenberg (I count this as a blessing) and I can add nothing to what James Bennet told the Post except to say that Greenberg is quite obviously an indecent person who should not be working in magazine journalism. Every so often, journalists become deranged at the sight of certain candidates, and lose their bearings. Why, this has even happened in the case of John McCain once or twice. What I find truly astonishing is the blithe way in which she has tried to hurt this magazine.”
I mean, this is an ethical nightmare. Didn’t this lady take that course in college? Will someone please enroll her in one at the community college of her choosing?
More interesting Jill Greenberg information at:
leave a comment