Oh yeah. I stopped reading Gawker around the time they WOULDN'T SHUT UP ABOUT THAT MAGAZINE. Radar? Whatever, it got really dull and I switched to other sites instead.
Re: It's Clear to MeredmenaceAugust 31 2005, 16:48:49 UTC
Check out the apologists explaining away the obviously fucked up language here. yes, it's two news agencies. Yes, there may have been "context" to each photo that we don't know. But CNN ran the same picture of the black guy and described him as dragging groceries through the water.
I think clearly the looter has a larger bag, like Halloween loot, taking not only what he needed but being greedy. The other two must have walked into a nearly empty grocery and searched high and low to "find" their bread. (P.S. crust punks, not vegan!)
See, I think he was "finding" for a large group of people who were unable to leave their homes. Elderly and handicapped. Whereas those kids were just taking for themselves! He's altruistic!
Here's a comment from the photographer who took the picture of the white folks, Chris Graythen:
I wrote the caption about the two people who 'found' the items. I believed in my opinion, that they did simply find them, and not 'looted' them in the definition of the word. The people were swimming in chest deep water, and there were other people in the water, both white and black. I looked for the best picture. there were a million items floating in the water - we were right near a grocery store that had 5+ feet of water in it. it had no doors. the water was moving, and the stuff was floating away. These people were not ducking into a store and busting down windows to get electronics. They picked up bread and cokes that were floating in the water. They would have floated away anyhow. I wouldn't have taken it, because I wouldn't eat anything that's been in that water. But I'm not homeless. (well, technically I am right now
( ... )
One man's "finders keepers" is a shop owner's looting. Anyway, it's nice to hear his side of the story. If this hadn't blown up to be such a big thing on the internerd today, I'd be more hesitant to believe it -- but something tells me that AFP probably asked him to issue some sort of statement after it started hitting larger blogs like Gawker. Now we need to hear from the dude who wrote the AP caption -- especially after CNN described the same guy as "carrying groceries."
While I'll defer to his personal experience, I stand by my larger statement. Is it "looting" to get food and water from a grocery store even if you cross into the inside in this kind of disaster? Is it looting to wait for it as some sort of windfall?
Actually, that comment was posted on a discussion board frequented by professional photographers. Here. I would be surprised if AFP or Getty issued any kind of response to the charges, especially this quickly.
As far as CNN's captions vs. AP's, I can tell you that CNN doesn't have any information about that photograph that AP did not run in the original caption. They likely did not label the person a looter because it would be an allegation - one that they could be liable for in court. I work for a competitor of CNN's and the news editors at my workplace were specifically instructed not to label anybody as a looter because of potential legal exposure.
-=-
Is it "looting" to get food and water from a grocery store...I thought NPR had an interesting take on it as I was driving home this evening. They used the term "survival looting" to label this kind of action. They wanted to distinguish it from the rampant theft of electronics, jewelry, and guns that is also going on
( ... )
Yeah, but considering the furor, his editor may have alerted him. That said, I also find it somewhat less than credible that he took the time out of his day of covering the flood to post on a message board. But you know stranger things have happened -- I'm skeptical but willing to accept the message on its face.
I had thought about liability issues w/r/t AFP using the word "find", especially coonsidering the stilted construction of the sentence "finding groceries FROM store" -- that makes sense to me that somebody in legal changed one word.
But the fact remains that AP (admittedly not AFP) had no problem calling the fellas in the second picture a looter. Do they not expect him to sue? Does he not get to consider himself not a looter for survival? Why do they not draw that line? I know that AP has not described every person "just trying to survive" as a looter; what is the policy on this?
But sometimes things may have a simpler explanation.Very true -- but sometimes things may have the equally simple explanation, sadly, that
( ... )
Comments 19
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Here's a comment from the photographer who took the picture of the white folks, Chris Graythen:
I wrote the caption about the two people who 'found' the items. I believed in my opinion, that they did simply find them, and not 'looted' them in the definition of the word. The people were swimming in chest deep water, and there were other people in the water, both white and black. I looked for the best picture. there were a million items floating in the water - we were right near a grocery store that had 5+ feet of water in it. it had no doors. the water was moving, and the stuff was floating away. These people were not ducking into a store and busting down windows to get electronics. They picked up bread and cokes that were floating in the water. They would have floated away anyhow. I wouldn't have taken it, because I wouldn't eat anything that's been in that water. But I'm not homeless. (well, technically I am right now ( ... )
Reply
Now we need to hear from the dude who wrote the AP caption -- especially after CNN described the same guy as "carrying groceries."
While I'll defer to his personal experience, I stand by my larger statement. Is it "looting" to get food and water from a grocery store even if you cross into the inside in this kind of disaster? Is it looting to wait for it as some sort of windfall?
Reply
Actually, that comment was posted on a discussion board frequented by professional photographers. Here. I would be surprised if AFP or Getty issued any kind of response to the charges, especially this quickly.
As far as CNN's captions vs. AP's, I can tell you that CNN doesn't have any information about that photograph that AP did not run in the original caption. They likely did not label the person a looter because it would be an allegation - one that they could be liable for in court. I work for a competitor of CNN's and the news editors at my workplace were specifically instructed not to label anybody as a looter because of potential legal exposure.
-=-
Is it "looting" to get food and water from a grocery store...I thought NPR had an interesting take on it as I was driving home this evening. They used the term "survival looting" to label this kind of action. They wanted to distinguish it from the rampant theft of electronics, jewelry, and guns that is also going on ( ... )
Reply
I had thought about liability issues w/r/t AFP using the word "find", especially coonsidering the stilted construction of the sentence "finding groceries FROM store" -- that makes sense to me that somebody in legal changed one word.
But the fact remains that AP (admittedly not AFP) had no problem calling the fellas in the second picture a looter. Do they not expect him to sue? Does he not get to consider himself not a looter for survival? Why do they not draw that line? I know that AP has not described every person "just trying to survive" as a looter; what is the policy on this?
But sometimes things may have a simpler explanation.Very true -- but sometimes things may have the equally simple explanation, sadly, that ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment