Editing tragic photos requires common sense and heart

AIM THIS PAGE

Immediately after the events of 9/11, there was considerable discussion about the content of many of the pictures used from the tragedy. The picture that became the catalyst for the conversations showed a person leaping or falling from the upper floors of the World Trade Center.

A majority of people in and out of the news media agreed that standards have not changed, but that the times we live in have. New technologies have inured audiences to shocking, emotional, and perhaps gruesome images.

Conflict of any kind, which news services are obliged to cover, is violent. This doesn’t mean, however, that we put common sense on hold.

When I was working at the Chicago Sun-Times I heard an apocryphal story from World War II. As the story goes, the British censors were very strict about the types of pictures the media could use, especially any showing wounded British soldiers. One picture that made it into print showed several women Ambulance drivers standing at a North African field hospital. To the side of the ambulance were two bodies -- one with a tattoo on an arm that spelled out Claire with a heart. The arm was resting on a book of Keats’ poetry.

Neighbors in a London suburb recognized this as the body of Sergeant Rodney Epps, whose young wife was Claire and whose great passion was reading poetry. The neighborhood was cast into great gloom and anguish.

While the story may not be factual, it illustrates a good point:

• When editing photos, look closely at the content. If there is anything in the image that might be highly emotional, gruesome, or otherwise might distressing, be sure that the content has no DIRECT relationship to your audience. For example, if presented with images of wounded American soldiers in Iraq, check the unit designation and use whatever means possible to determine if members of that unit have family in your circulation area. Only then can you make an informed decision on the use of that image.

• Be in tune with your audience and know the level of shock and emotion at which the public will tune out.
  
• Gauge what the image will mean to members of the public. The consumer in general doesn’t understand the process of image selection. They don’t care about it, but they do care about what it tells them that they don’t already know. They care whether it will make them sick or traumatize their children. They care whether it is sensational just for the for the sake of sensation.

In a war with Iraq or any other country, there will be lots of photos and film to choose from. The “gruesome factor” will range from non-existent to overwhelming. There will be images in the overwhelming category that will be the only way to visually illustrate a point. Think again of the 9/11 picture of the body falling. This was an overwhelming image on the “gruesome” scale. However, it also allowed us to see first hand that the event was so terrible that it was preferable to leap to sure death than to remain in the building.

Very soon or in the future, you will receive pictures like that. You still need to question the overall information value to the largest percentage of your readers and viewers. If you can satisfy yourself that the news value is there -- and strong -- and that the majority of people will gain insight into an international crises, you then will have then fulfilled the major criteria for publication.

pnesbitt@verizon.net