Photographic Ethics: The "Weegee dilemma"

[RayPA]

Unless an accident scene is controlled by firemen &| police, I always stop and ask if help is needed. Even if there are people around, sometimes it takes the right person (CPA training etc).

This January, most likely, my life was saved in a motorcycle accident, by a handful of people that protected me on the freeway, while I had passed out on the fast lane, waiting for an ambulance. Also, witnesses helped me later when fault was at question. I am very grateful to those people, most of them I don't know and don't even remember their faces.

In other countries (Germany for instance) you can go to prison for not offering help and moving on.

Rubber-necking is one of the worst human behaviors there is, IMO.

You did well Rafael. Sometimes you have to set priorities.

Roland.

I use to think that too, Roland, but I have to wonder what this world would be like if instead of pausing to look, to see, we carried on without even batting an eye, speeding past. Indifference to a tragedy however minor is a far worse human behavior.

I wholeheartedly agree, btw, that one has an obligation to assist at the scene of an accident if no public service personnel are onsite.

🙂

 

[rogue_designer]

You neither caused the accident, or were needed to assist following it. I see no dillema in documenting it. Perhaps your images would be powerful, or newsworthy, or perhaps they would be requested for a court case to help the victims receive fair compensation. At the very least they would be a record.

But only you can decide what your personal comfort level and reasons for shooting would be in a given situation. I can see myself acting precisely as you did one day, and the next going back with the camera - there are too many internal criteria.

 

[Rafael]

You did well Rafael. Sometimes you have to set priorities.

Roland.

Thanks Roland.

 

[Rafael]

YOU MADE THE RIGHT DECISION. It is far more difficult to portray beauty in life than tragedy and misery.

Thanks to you too Steve.

 

[lmd91343]

Rafael,

You did the right thing. Compassion & help for people comes before art. Sometimes there is an overriding journalistic concern for society, our right to know, but in my years I have never found myself in that situation.

A couple of years ago I came home one evening and there was a group of about 10 people in the yard four houses up the street. I went there to find out what was going on. There was a murder suicide event. The bodies were on gurneys (sp?). I ran home grabbed my camera, but I could not get past my front door, I could not intrude on the last act of my neighbors' lives.

A day following the '94 Northridge earthquake, I heard of a grocery store that was open from the radio. We lived almost on top of the epicenter and suffered much damage and lost all of our food. I had a four year old child to feed. I got in the car to drive the two and one half miles to store. It was slow going with the traffic lights out. But close to the store the lights were on and traffic was still slow. Tourists and rubberneckers were holding up the traffic! A guy in Bermuda shorts with a Leica about his neck stepped in front of my car stopping my progress. I tapped my horn and he gave me a one finger salute and refused to move. He was going to get his shot. I had not showered in 48 hours and wanted food for my 4 year old. I had also spent about an hour in the car driving two plus miles. Who had a greater right to the patch of asphalt me or the guy with the Leica?

To this day, I am sorry that I did not make a Leica hood ornament at that moment! That would have been a journalistic moment!

Melanie found herself in the most horrible of situations. No one should ever have to deal with that.

 

[ghost]

i'm almost done (re)reading "on photography", and sontag follows up on these issues in "regarding the pain of others", which i haven't read yet. might be worth looking into.

 

[bob cole]

Photographic Ethics: The "Weegee dilemma"

There is a very famous anecdote about Punch Sulzberger, the father of the current boss at The New York Times. As I recall some of the details, many years ago, at a time he was, I believe, the boss at The Times, he was in the stands watching a major car race somewhere in Europe when the driver of one car lost control and touched off a serious crash scene...He watched what happened but never thought of letting anyone know at The Times...As others have said in other ways, it just takes a certain Je Ne Sais Quois to be a reporter or a photographer and some people just don't think in those terms...

 

[MelanieC]

Ywenz, I think you are beginning to believe that you are your avatar.

I am my avatar and my feelings are quite similar.

 

[Kin Lau]

Melanie, I'm not disagreeing with you, but just sharing a point of view... can you imagine if your dad was taken to the hospital and no one even came out? Some see neighbours gathering around as a sign of concern rather than gawking, and I'm certain there was some of the latter as well.

Where do we draw the line btwn curiosity, concern and indifference?

We all react, think and are brought up differently.

For reference, I was orphaned by the time I was 10, and rode behind the ambulance carrying my father then my mother both times.

 

[mpt600]

A while ago I was in the fast lane of the motorway, which had ground to a halt because of the rubber-neckers stopping to have a look at the accident scene on the opposing carriageway. Firemen were trying to seperate the charred corpse of a truck driver from his equally charred/melted seat. Someone a few cars ahead of me stopped a bit too long, so a fireman ran across screaming at him and literally chased him away. If anyone had got a camera out, they might've ended up in one of the many ambulances gathered to take away the injured. Recording this sort of thing can result in resentment. Having press credentials my help. Saying you're an amateur and find it interesting may not.

But hey, it's a free country. But you need a thick skin for this sort of thing.

 

[Peter Klein]

I've actually been in such a situation before, and experienced all the emotions mentioned in this thread. An auto accident happened right outside of my workplace a few years ago. I did take pictures. No one was hurt, and the aftermath of the accident was quite funny. It was a visual pun on the words "bus stop." Click on these links to see what I mean:

http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/temp/1864Small.jpg
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/temp/1865Small.jpg

The person in the second picture is the tow truck driver.

The driver of the VW bus told me (a bit beligerently) that I couldn't take pictures. I told him that this was a public street, and I had every right to do so. Later a policewoman asked me if I was with the media, and I said no, but gave her my number in case they wanted copies of the photos. They didn't, so I suspect they took their own. I did submit the pictures to a local paper, and they were interested. But it was not a slow news day, so they didn't make it in.

Now, the interesting part of this was that my "photojournalist instinct" kicked in and I took the pictures. But I felt a bit sleazy doing so. I felt bad for the driver. But I also realized that if he had veered a few degrees more in one direction, he would have ended up crashing through a window into the office of a colleague--a person who I like very much, and often assist with computer issues. She could have been turned into hamburger. Or I, or anyone I worked with.

Or, what if there had been people waiting at the bus shelter? There were some good reasons to take the pictures--legal, insurance, photojournalistic. When the driver told me I couldn't take pictures, I became more determined to do so. If he'd asked me politely, I might have complied.

Even so, I pixellated out the license plate before sharing the pictures with other photo friends. I eventually took down all but the above two shots, which make the "bus stop" visual pun without personally identifying information.

Had there been injuries, there would have been more reasons to shoot, but also more reasons not to. I don't know for sure what I would have done, but probably just helped my injured colleagues if I could. Life and limb are more important than a few pictures.

I can really relate to Melanie's remark about deciding against journalism as a career. I used to write music and theatre criticism, and I hated to give anyone a bad review. Schadenfreude is not my idea of fun. To some degree all journalists prey upon others' misfortunes. We need them in a free society, and yet they often must do things that a nice, polite person would not. This may be one reason why many people dislike and distrust journalists.

--Peter

 

[sf]

Every morning I take one of our dogs and walk my wife to the bus stop when she leaves for work. This morning, I was walking back to the house when all of a sudden I heard a squeal of tires and a huge bang. I came around the corner and found the wreck of a car that had just slammed into a house. A group of people had already assembled and were busy trying to get to the driver and calling police and ambulances. I was not an actual witness to the accident and the group of people there had everything in hand. So there was no need for me to stay at the scene of the accident. In fact, I would only have gotten in the way. However, I was only a block and a half from my own house where my M4 was loaded with film and my bag was ready to go. I raced home with every intention of dropping off the dog and heading back out to the scene of the accident with camera in hand. But after a few moments' reflection, I decided not to go.

I am still not sure whether or not I regret my decision. The accident looked pretty gruesome. And seeing as how I would not have been taking photographs for any news agency but solely for my own interest, I thought that I would have felt uncomfortable moving through the large crowd taking photographs. On the other hand, this was an opportunity to capture some pretty powerful images. What I am calling the "Weegee problem" is a dilemma that has been discussed at great lengths. However, this was the first time that I have actually found myself in a position of having to make that decision. Have you ever found yourself in a similar situation? What did you do? What would you have done in my situation?

I have never been in that exact position - but I have been witness to pretty gruesome aspects of the human world. One example is freezing homeless people in Paris or a dying man in LA. It did cross my mind that a photograph could be made, but I have never been able to cross that barrier of conscience. The news is one thing, but for artistic purposes, this is a very delicate problem.

 

[ywenz]

I've actually been in such a situation before, and experienced all the emotions mentioned in this thread. An auto accident happened right outside of my workplace a few years ago. I did take pictures. No one was hurt, and the aftermath of the accident was quite funny. It was a visual pun on the words "bus stop." Click on these links to see what I mean:

http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/temp/1864Small.jpg
http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/temp/1865Small.jpg

Okay don't take this personally, but where is the journalistic value inthese pictures? Why does every photojournalist wanna-be think every car accident they witness is news worthy? Were these "subpar at best" shots worth getting into a confrontation for? I'm pissed that I just wasted my time looking at them. I'm just glad at least it wasn't a serious accident...

 

[ywenz]

Ywenz, I think you are beginning to believe that you are your avatar.

Yes, and the person in your avatar would have crawled out of the burning car and make a candid pose for the photographer and afterwards ask him if he recently had his Leica CLAed... Whatever floats your boat I guess 😎

 

[Rafael]

Okay don't take this personally, but where is the journalistic value of these pictures? Why does every photojournalist wanna be think every car accident they witness is news worthy? Were these "subpar at best" shots worth getting into a confrontation for? I'm pissed that I just wasted my time looking at them. I'm glad at least it wasn't a serious accident...

Ywenz, your personal attacks are way out of line. First you accuse FrankS of racism (I don't know whether it was you or a mod who deleted that post) and now this. But hey, dig your own grave.

 

[ywenz]

Ywenz, your personal attacks are way out of line. First you accuse FrankS of racism (I don't know whether it was you or a mod who deleted that post) and now this. But hey, dig your own grave.

It is an indication of my disgust for any kind of acceptance of this type of behavior.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I think what people are missing here is that there are two types of photojournalistic photography: that done by people who truly want to do no more than chronicle an event for historical purposes and those who want to chronicle the event for personal gain. Sometimes recording an event can bring you money, but it shouldn't be the first priority.

As photographers, we have to pick and choose very carefully, always thinking of ethics, what we do and do not bring a camera out for. I think that in this case asking if someone is needed to take a few photos would be okay...but just going in and taking them without even asking would have been bad. Always play on the side of caution and do what you feel is right.

I can see where both Melanie and ywenz come from and I'd feel very similar to them if someone just came up during a tragedy and started gawking. If you can help in some way, photographically related or not, do so. If there are plenty of people, ask if there's something you can do but be prepared to be told that there's nothing you can do and just move away.

So...you did the right thing. If it was me, I would have asked if I could help and mentioned that I had a camera if there was any need for photo documentation, but I would have focused on the people first. People are always more important than any photographic oportunity. Even without photography, you still have the chance to write about it.

 

[Rafael]

It is an indication of my disgust for any kind of acceptance of this type of behavior.

It is fine to be disgusted by it. But there are appropriate and inappropriate means of expressing your disgust.

Misery, sadness, despair, loss, grief, pain: these are all real human emotions. If you believe that they have no place in photography or in art, you are certainly entitled to that opinion. However, in a forum such as this, you will need to come up with significantly more mature and better articulated arguments than you have to this point to support your position.

One need only look through any book of photojournalism to see that photographers exploring and documenting the human condition have often investigated these types of emotions. But expressions of such "negative" emotions are hardly limited to photography. Why are people so drawn to watching tragedies such as Hamlet or Macbeth performed on stage? Why are sad love songs so popular and so timeless? The great movies are full of expressions of grief and sadness. Why do we go back to watch them again and again? Should art only be about happy feelings and happy moments? I certainly agree with those who have argued that it is far more difficult to find and record expressions of happiness amidst chaos, pain, and tragedy. But images that record such expressions rarely diminish the pain and sorrow that surrounds their subjects. On the contrary, the power of such images usually comes from the juxtaposition of emotions that they present.

One can certainly cast the decision of whether or not to photograph at the scene of an accident in very crass terms. And I hold no grand illusions of myself as any "great artist." But I do think that many many photographers, myself included, do consider themselves to be exploring and documenting aspects of the human condition. And, as has already become apparent from the discussion in this thread, the issues at play in that enterprise can run very deep.

There was a recent thread here about the World Press Awards. Would the world be better off if some of those very harsh images had never been published? Think of the image from a few years back of the man being held in Afghanistan (I think, or he may have been at Guantanamo Bay). The image was shot through barbed wire and shows the man with a hood over his head holding his young child. The photographer recorded a very personal moment in whch the man and his child obviously felt great despair. Should the photographer have taken the shot?

Obviously this case is very different from that which I faced this morning. The accident that I came across had very little news value, virtually none when compared with the "War on Terror." But put the "newsworthiness" of the two cases aside for a moment. Both cases involve questions about the ethics of documenting the intensely personal emotions of others. The issue of whether or not it is appropriate to photograph moments of intense sadness or pain is, therefore, pertinent to both cases. And it is that issue that I sought to discuss here.

I chose not to photograph the accident scene this morning. I did not feel comfortable doing so because I worried that my presense would offend those closely affected by the tragedy. However, I do think that many photographs documenting intensely personal moments of grief and pain are important parts of the history of photography. The issue at hand is just not as simple as you make it out to be.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

A very well thought out post, Rafael. I agree.

 

[ywenz]

It is fine to be disgusted by it. But there are appropriate and inappropriate means of expressing your disgust. .

What!? I told the Peter Klein guy his documentation of an accident had no value what so ever. Then I questioned cost/reward ratio of his action. What was wrong with that?

What I said to Frank was in direct response to a comment he made about me.