<p>I think the memorials on the side of the road are sobering reminders.</p>
<p>I guess unless it’s in your front yard.</p>
<p>The family is upset, yes, but how many more families might have a loved one saved because someone saw this picture? </p>
<p>I don’t find the picture objectionable…the news is out there-picture or not…and if we hide the news, then kids don’t SEE the real impact of what they are doing</p>
<p>For kids to still ride around without seatbelts is just plain arrogant, stupid and careless, not to mention hateful to the rest of us- yes hateful- others have to deal with the mess left behind because they just couldn’t be bothered</p>
<p>If this picture saves one kids life, it is worth it</p>
<p>I saw the picture. I don’t find it objectionable. </p>
<p>OTOH … I think any photograph, even of just the car … would have been upsetting to the family. I agree that the expressions and body language from the paramedics tell most of the story.</p>
<p>What is more hurtful to the families than a photo such as this are the comment boards run by the papers where people criticize the deceased.</p>
<p>We have a speeder who was driving in dangerous conditions who fortuneatley didn’t kill someone else</p>
<p>I appreciate all the comments above, so I won’t repeat what has been said.</p>
<p>As a former semi-pro journalist, I’d print that in a second. It does what photojournalism is supposed to do – it tells a clear story in a single image. It’s a small, local, painful story, but it’s still newsworthy for a local outlet. It’s also very human and moving. I wouldn’t be surprised if the photog was nominated for a local journalism award.</p>
<p>Wow! I’m glad I looked!</p>
<p>I too was hesitant to look, but did so hoping it wasn’t some mean joke about how sadistic I really am for looking. OP, my heart is so heavy just from reading your elegant post, and it was even heavier when I saw that car and the faces of the ems workers. However, I feel the need to show my kids- I want them to see and to remember how important it is to respect the elements. Thankfully- he did not injure others, and nothing will take away the pain from family and friends but I do agree that the post was not distasteful - it was shocking and heartbreaking but it is news. </p>
<p>On another note- to the poster who wrote about funniest home videos- my kids make fun of me because I watch it and do laugh hysterically. I always thought that we laugh because we can relate. The viewers who send them are laughing at themselves. So maybe we aren’t really sadistic- maybe just glad that there are others who can make light of their light hearted humiliating moments. - of which I have had my share! Or maybe we look at what we fear. I don’t know about that one.</p>
<p>My comment in post #27 was ever so slightly tongue in cheek. I was responding to the idea that this was potentially award winning photography and that inrtigues me, but otherwise, it does not change my driving. Unfortunately I have no shortage of ghastly images to add anxiety, err…caution, to my day to day life. I did appreciate the comments about the images of the response team, but again, I share enough tragedy every day. I do think I sometimes click on posts here that imply someone is worse off than me and mine, and i wonder if that’s related. I said “home videos” but i can’t remember the names of some others which depict horrific accidents, or those “home videos” with something bordering on abuse of pets and children, or teens/young people who take risks for the viewers enjoyment. And “Cops”. I don’t like the idea that viewers get something out of seeing others at their lowest momnents. I can’t beleive this deters the true criminal from this behavior, and I wonder if reckless drivers change when they see accidents as well. The ones I speak to always seem to think they are too skilled, special, to make a mistake, or don’t think they will live long anyway. If they are accidents, so be it, but filmiing it, and watching it just makes me wonder.</p>
<p>I think it’s an astonishingly good photograph, definitely newsworthy. I think it’s very difficult for families when their loved ones become news–imagine how Caroline Kennedy must feel about the iconic pictures of JFK. But news is news.</p>
<p>I don’t object to the photograph. The family is obviously hurting; I think they would find most pictures relating to the accident objectionable. Would the boy’s blood on pavement be less tragic for them to see? I doubt it. This is a local news story, and I think the picture is very appropriate and helps to tell the story, which is really the point of the photo journalism. As others have said, the focus in that photograph is the emergency workers. You cannot see the boy’s face or any disfigured body parts, and when this photo was taken he had not actually died. I appreciate the pain that this story and associated photos may have brought to the family, but that does not change how the story should have been told/portrayed. This photo is quite tasteful, I believe, and does not cross the line of acceptability. </p>
<p>I can think of several news photos that I will never forget, even though a couple of them I haven’t seen in over five years. Some of these photos are tragic, heartbreaking, graphic, or even disturbing. They also have an impact, and they tell a story. The family members of the people in those photos would probably find them very hard to look at, but that does not mean they shouldn’t be shown.</p>
<p>shrinkrap, while many adults who have been driving for decades may not be moved to change their driving habits because of this photograph, especially if there is no connection to the victim, don’t you think there are some teenagers from that community who might be temporarily changed, if not permanently changed in their driving habits? Or perhaps they just think twice about whether or not goofing off in a car is such a good idea as opposed to not ever giving it a second thought?</p>
<p>My changes in driving habits personally never happened until I was in a wreck. I’ve been in several, but in none of them was I ever cited even 1% of blame - it was always 100% the other person’s fault. Even though I was doing everything right when I was hit, it still changed how I drive (or maybe just how often I look in the rearview mirror now since that’s what tends to happen to me).</p>
<p>"don’t you think there are some teenagers from that community who might be temporarily changed, if not permanently changed in their driving habits? "</p>
<p>I suppose that’s so. Anyway, I am no longer feeling critical. Apparently this is a great photo and I can appreciate that.</p>
<p>I’m sorry for not responding to all your great response yet. I’ve been busy but I’ve read them all.</p>
<p>The overwhelming majority of you believe that the picture is tasteful. I agree. The picture is not something that is “graphic” (as I stated in my first post). This is why I can see the point of the newspaper photographer. The picture does tell a story.</p>
<p>But, the paper isn’t a national or even a regional newspaper. It serves a county located about 45 minutes south of Cleveland with about 125,000-150,000 residents. My two main concerns about the printing of such a picture are:</p>
<p>1) They should have asked the family first. Being a local newspaper, I think they have more of a responsibility to respect the family and community’s wishes. The photographer stated that that he knew the family would be upset with the printing of such a photograph. I think they should have respected such wishes and settled on a picture without any part of the body. A picture of the car and a recent school photo may have worked well. I doubt the same photo would have appeared if it were the editor’s child.</p>
<p>2) I seriously doubt too many people will learn much directly from this photograph. The only people who I believe will even be temporarily careful due to this event are people who knew the young man. In this case, a recent photo + mangled car may have worked even better than this picture alone. For me, the most touching part was not this particular picture, but going on his and his sister’s facebooks and looking at a myriad of old pictures of him and knowing that he is no longer here. If anything, this will make me be a more cautious driver than the newspaper photo.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow… I can’t ever really see this happening. Think about the precedent it would set in journalism. Who decides which families are given the option of having pictures printed? How do you maintain consistent standards from newspaper to newspaper, region to region and country to country?</p>
<p>While it hasn’t been directly said on this thread, had this wreck occured under more normal driving conditions, and this young man hadn’t been driving wrecklessly, this picture would not have had the same impact. In the Chicago Tribune, they’ve been running a series for well over a year on teenage deaths from wreckless driving; put in the perspective of an ongoing story, it’s very powerfully shown me a much larger picture than just what goes on in my own community. The pictures they’ve run tend to be high school yearbook pictures, but I wonder if they stopped to ask families for their permission to include their child in the series, what some of them would say. I think the Tribune’s series is partly to take credit for some recent changes in our state’s driving laws for teens; and that makes it worth it.</p>
<p>Hello,</p>
<p>I am the photojournalist who covered the tragic motor vehicle accident on Smith Road that is being discussed in this thread. Due to a newly adopted policy regarding the internet, I had to remove any work-related content (pictures) from my Flickr account, with the exception of my portfolio. So, for those who may be new to the thread, or for those who need to view the pictures again for a visual reminder of its content, I apologize. The picture no longer exists anywhere on the internet that I have control over. With that being said, I’d like to take a moment to ask if anyone has any questions that may help clear up a lot of the confusion and conjecture surrounding the incident. There are a lot of issues that I could address; however, I would feel more comfortable discussing your concerns about our decision to run the picture and story, how I approached the assignment, and the pitfalls of engaging in this type of work. Of course, I can also address very specific questions about morality, ethics, intent, sensationalism, community perspective, etc …</p>
<p>Any and all beliefs, views, and opinions expressed by me are not representational of those held by my employer, The Medina (County) Gazette. (Legal disclaimer)</p>
<p>Thanks for your time.</p>
<p>Best,</p>
<p>— Andrew</p>
<p>Andrew Dolph
Staff Photographer, Multimedia Photojournalist
The Medina Gazette</p>
<p>Andrew, I appreciate your taking the time to post and to answer questions.</p>
<p>I think it would be very helpful to those who aren’t familiar with how journalists make their decisions if you’d describe the journalistic issues around this kind of assignment including your approach and the decision to run the picture. </p>
<p>It also would be interesting and helpful to hear what kind of feedback you’ve gotten locally about the picture.</p>
<p>Thank you so much for adding your important voice to this forum.</p>
<p>Andrew: </p>
<p>I don’t know if you were even part of the decision to post the picture on the front page but I have a couple of questions -</p>
<p>Do you have any regrets that the picture was posted on the front page, especially when some members of the family reportedly expressed outrage over it?</p>
<p>Don’t you think that the family’s opinion of whether the picture should be posted on the front page is more important than the opinion of the person at the paper who made the decision to post it?</p>
<p>I’ve seen the picture and think it was tasteful and compassionate, and was indeed worthy of the front page. There also was nothing gruesome about it. The focus was on the concerned faces of the people who were attempting to save the boy’s life. The only part of his body that was shown were his feet and legs, which had no sign of injury. I also think that the publication of that picture might encourage many people to drive more safely.</p>
<p>I do not think that victims’ families should be able to determine what kind of pictures are published or broadcasted. I am sure that if it were up to the families, not only would no pictures be run, but there also would be no info in the story that disparaged victims in any way such as info that the victim was intoxicated, driving erratically, lacked a drivers’ license or wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. While I empathize with them, I think that the media has a right to tell and show stories within the bounds of what our legal system allows (which means, in part, that one couldn’t deliberately expose someone to shame, hatred or ridicule unless the facts were provably true).</p>
<p>I’m with Nsm on this. The fact is, anything published about the accident is going to cause the family additional pain. Sad, but true. Given that, I think it’s pretty reasonable for the editors/photographers/writers to make the decision together about how to strike the balance between discretion and information. If the family’s wishes were listened to above all else, there would be nothing published, which is not the optimum situation.</p>