Banned from r/Leica for a Photo of John Abernathy being Arrested/Assaulted and tossing his M10 to a Fellow Photographer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course, one person's 'innocuous comment' is another's trigger.

For the record nothing has been deleted in this thread. What's been deleted on this forum (in other threads) recently are personal attacks, ad hominems and specific language usage that invariably leads to flame wars.

So far in this thread there have been opinions shared but no personal attacks, no ad hominems, no wording that would lead into conflicts.

Just opinions.

Where is the heat in this thread? Can you point it out? Is it true heat 🔥or is it just someone expressing an opinion you don't like?

Members have a right to post their opinion as long as it does not break other forum rules. There is no censorship on this forum -- no viewpoint moderation, only behavior moderation. It must also be mentioned that DMs have been sent to some participants in this thread, thanks to those who have continued to keep things from going beyond.

If you don't agree with a person's post, do your best to present your position while following forum guidelines, and continue the discussion.
 
Last edited:
On his website, Abernathy describes himself as a "documentary photographer based in Minneapolis." His portfolio (I only saw the website) includes commercial work (Target and other clients) and recent events in Minneapolis. He does not claim to be a "dispassionate photojournalist" as chuckroast would insist that he be, even as he acknowledges that journalistic bias exists and cannot separated from documenting events.

Interesting that Robert Capa is invoked as an exemplar of great photojournalism because he was willing to risk his life to get a photo. Arguably, Abernathy was doing the same thing. Capa, as everyone knows, was an ardent opponent of Spanish fascism, and his photography exemplified his stated beliefs. One of the interesting questions this discussion has brought up is: what is photojournalism in this day and age? For me, (photo)journalism should speak truth to power. Full stop. Throughout the world, we are living a moment when the power of the state is greater than ever, the power of the people at its lowest point. If the state purports to define truth, then a countervailing force is necessary. So yes, journalism still has a role to play, as flawed as it may be.

One more point: given that Abernathy is Minneapolis-based, why should he be "objective" about what is happening there?
 
Retro-Grouch said:
....I am not in favor of censorship, ...
Click to expand...

splitimageview said:
....

For the record nothing has been deleted in this thread.
...
......
Members have a right to post their opinion as long as it does not break other forum rules.

If you don't agree with a person's post, do your best to present your position while following forum guidelines, and continue the discussion.
Click to expand...

None of the Mods, nor our Head Bartender is in favor of censorship. We do not practice it. RFF has a set of rules that have been honed over the years that allow for respectful disagreement around photography.

Please keep in mind, casting shade on other members opinions is not allowed. Please present your perspective in a respectful manner.

Thank you.

B2 (;->
 
hmm 0
Disappointed_Horse said:
I've been purposely avoiding this thread for the last several days, as I have strong opinions about what's going on and don't want to make any statements that are going to get me in trouble here. So I'm going to ask a few questions instead:

  • What "war zone" did Abernathy enter?
  • Was there some congressional declaration of war that I missed?
  • Is it the federal government that is at war?
  • Who is the federal government at war with in an American city?
  • What is the legal basis of this "war"?
  • From his website, it appears John Abernathy is based in Minneapolis. So in what way did he "choose to enter a war zone"? Walking down the streets of an American city is not (or should not be) "choosing to enter a war zone."
  • What "police" are you referring to? What jobs were they trying to do? (Hint: it is not the job of police to fight wars.)
Click to expand...

The words "war zone" are metaphorical meaning "an area of high conflict and strong potential for violence" as evidenced by prior events.

The conflict was initiated by opponents to current immigration law and it's enforcement. If memory serves, that law has more-or-less been on the books since the 1950s. Notice that when the Obama administration expelled 3 million people here illegally and over 50 people died in custody, there was no mass rioting and protest in the streets. This is 100% and an anti-administration political movement willing to disobey law and interfere with lawful police actions.

It is not the doing of the Federal government that is merely trying to do its legally mandated job. The "legal basis" for ICE/DHS action lies in long standing codified American law. Nothing new to see here.

Abernathy chose to enter the area where to conflict was likely to arise - not all of the city is in conflict, probably most of it isn't. You have to go where it is, intentionally. All well and good if you intent is to just observe and report. But by his own testimony, he took up common cause with the protestors by picking up a tear gas canister. This means his standing as just a journalist ended then and there. He became part of the story by choice.

The job the police are trying to do is the one that is part of American law and has been for decades. The enforcement of borders and managing immigration is reserved to the Federal government and it's sworn officers. Interfering with such work is actually a felony and can carry significant legal penalties.

As an immigrant to the US myself, I find it tragic that Americans born here know so very little about what the laws are and what the role of the Federal government is supposed to be. There is a way to change laws we don't like. If people don't like the laws, they should elect representatives that will change them. I, for one, think the current targeting of illegals is too broad. But it's the law and law gives the Chief Execuivte the discretion to do just that. I vote my views, I don't scream at government officials and officers doing their jobs.

Nature punishes stupidity. If you stick your hand in the tiger's cage and get bit, you can't say, "That's so very unfair, I love tigers."
 
Last edited:
Is it not possible that two things can be true at the same time?

Abernathy was seized and unreasonably pepper sprayed by federal officers.

And.

Abernathy, by his own words, made the decision to involve himself in a situation with a group known for its violent actions.

Such are the risks that everyone - not just photojournalists - takes when entering contentious and potentially explosive situations, especially if they act in a way that puts them on 'the other side'.

A couple of years ago in Melbourne, there was a large demonstration regarding the desired secession of a Sikh state called Khalistan from India. There were loads of flags, and hundreds of Sikhs in the Melbourne CBD. Fights broke out between Sikhs and Indians. I just happened across the demonstration and took loads of photos. At no time did I put myself between the Sikhs and Indians, and unremarkably, I was unmolested. Funny how that works.
 
Last edited:
Archiver said:
Is it not possible that two things can be true at the same time?

Abernathy was seized and unreasonably pepper sprayed by federal officers.

And.

Abernathy, by his own words, made the decision to involve himself in a situation with a group known for its violent actions.

Such are the risks that everyone - not just photojournalists - takes when entering contentious and potentially explosive situations, especially if they act in a way that puts them on 'the other side'.

A couple of years ago in Melbourne, there was a large demonstration regarding the desired secession of an Sikh state called Khalistan from India. There were loads of flags, and hundreds of Sikhs in the Melbourne CBD. Fights broke out between Sikhs and Indians. I just happened across the demonstration and took loads of photos. At no time did I put myself between the Sikhs and Indians, and unremarkably, I was unmolested. Funny how that works.
Click to expand...

Both can be true. The problem is defining "unreasonably".
 
chuckroast said:
As an immigrant to the US myself, I find it tragic that Americans born here know so very little about what the laws are and what the role of the Federal government is supposed to be. There is a way to change laws we don't like. If people don't like the laws, they should elect representatives that will change them. I, for one, think the current targeting of illegals is too broad. But it's the law and law gives the Chief Execuivte the discretion to do just that. I vote my views, I don't scream at government officials and officers doing their jobs.

Nature punishes stupidity. If you stick your hand in the tiger's cage and get bit, you can't say, "That's so very unfair, I love tigers."
Click to expand...
And the civil rights movement wouldn't have had change if it wasn't for the protests movements of the 50s and 60s.
 
Guy with a camera walks into a crowd of angry people and gets his ass kicked but saves his camera and pictures. Sums it up. From that you must develop a point of view. Can't go through life without thinking. If you have no opinion, you have no ability think. No brain. Can't be like that. Unless you wanna be president.

Carry on.





........................................................................
 
I think what we're trying to do here is keep this forum as a place where everyone, no matter their political views, can feel welcome to talk about photography.

There are so many places on the internet that will welcome your views on all things political and let you fight and scream and call names, etc. We'd like this forum not to be one of them.

Thanks for understanding.

Best,
-Tim
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom