Old school Photojournalism is still alive and well

[Steve M.]

I ran into the following article while looking at the NY Times online this morning. What I found captivating were the photos and their captions. They told the story so well that you almost didn't need to read the article, which was about the growing problem of obesity and diabetes in India due to Western junk food. It isn't often that I see Photojournalism that makes me stop and think.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/26/health/india-diabetes-junk-food.html

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

I like your title for this thread, as well as the article it leads to, thanks!

 

[AFenvy]

I'm not sure I would say alive and well, but still kicking. There have been many NYTimes articles recently that I thought were well written and well photographed with proper credit given to the photographer as well. That makes me smile.

However there have also been articles that were very rushed, poorly written, with iffy sources and bad photography pulled from a poor source as well. Journalistic integrity has to compete with immediate pageviews, so compromises are definitely there. I feel like you'll see a huge divide in the quality between the breaking news and the more long-form articles. It's why I prefer the weekly news format to the daily - often times the daily news is totally misinformed and confused where the weekly has a compilation of real data, proper photos, and an actual analysis.

 

[emraphoto]

there are a few outlets left that are keeping the scattered remains of photojournalism on life support. the nytimes and the guardian are two that come to mind. fair rates and MOST IMPORTANTLY they pay on time with no hassles.

sadly they are an increasingly limited group. 'old school photojournalism' is on an iron lung at best.