Photojournalism is Dead?

[PKR]

Anyone who thinks photojournalism is dead should check out Burn Magazine and then come back and say it again.

Hi Jay;

I couldn't find any kind of payment for use list on the site. Do you know what they pay for an image or story?

pkr

 

[film nut]

The days that Neil Burgess refers to had an economy in which the magazine and book was well supported. Photography done then was about state-of-the-art. Some very good photojournalists were supported and rewarded for their integrity.

What is different today? The media has changed, but the economic dynamics remain the same. The economy no longer needs considered photojournalists, nor journalists in general. What it thinks it needs, and what it pursues exclusively is money, just as before, but today without self-reflection and guidance from strident, intelligent and diligent peers. Today the bean counters and PR types run the media, make the news decisions, make the market.

Society, the people, need good journalists but the people are not going to work any harder to support them than they ever did. People take the path of least resistance, and today that is Fast Media - thoughtless junk.

Newspapers fired their proof readers decades ago. You can find poor grammar, typos, and the typical mistakes of rapid typing and inconsiderate writing in almost every popular media article today. Discrimination in writing and imagery was never the forte of the public, but at least at one time the image and print media could inform the public of considered thought and imagery. No longer.

A subtext to what is happening today is the glorification of foolishness, which the public has always fostered but did not have the opportunity to express. Now with the internet anyone can tack utterly idiotic, egoist, self-serving comments to a news article. The very fact that journals encourage the same indicates to me that they will remain uncritical because skimming the surface for schmaltz is cost effective.

We can still have thoughtful journalism, and a great deal still exists, but not in the mainstream, not here, and probably not within the lines of text I just contributed.

You're right about everything. Even my local newspaper fits in perfectly. The only photos are from local readers, news articles are from USA Today and any local news coverage is so full of misspelled words and gramatical errors that you wonder ( I wonder) why I keep paying for it. When I was a boy I remember seeing newspaper photographers all over town with their cameras around there neck. I don't think I've seen any around since 1975.

MIke

 

[JayGannon]

Hi Jay;

I couldn't find any kind of payment for use list on the site. Do you know what they pay for an image or story?

pkr

500 per story and a 15,000 dollar grant.

 

[emraphoto]

Burn
Report Mag
Stern
Latitude
The Lens
DaysJapan
LaPresse

the list is enormous and they all pay.

Alexia Foundation
Aftermath
F Award
Oskar Barnak
Gugenheim
Eugene Smith
Expressions
Care International

The award/grant list is enormous and it all pays.

Oxfam
Care
UN
MSG
RSF
Lewis Foundation

the NGO list goes on.

I will skip the festival and gallery circuit as I am sure you get the point.

We seem to often confuse the health of daily newspaper staff jobs as the indicator of the health of photojournalism. If your plans are to pick up your pool gear and head out the door collecting your staff wage for the day then yes, you should be re-thinking things.

 

[surfer dude]

The king is dead! Long live the king!