For me, it's the fact that they were offered in a public auction format and
for such an exorbitant price.
It has a BLATANT APPEARANCE of trying to profit in a big way from the death
of another. It's not like he had the only pictures of the crash and was a
scant resource for documentary pictures, nor his he now offering them
explicitly to the appropriate news organizations.
He is hoping there is someone mentally-ill enough out there that will get
their jollies from this sort of thing. If these pictures weren't already
purchased by the news organizations (other journalists) then what
journalistic value do they have at this point in time? They've had their
fill, they need no more pictures of the same thing, so now he is hoping to
profit from sensationalism and not journalism.
If I started a bidding war for nude pictures of my wife on an auction site,
that would have more ethical and moral value than this guy's auction.
Tom C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Walkden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 12:02 AM
Subject: Re[6]: $50K for 8 negatives at ebay
> Hi,
>
> it isn't _about_ journalism. Journalism comes into it because that's
> the main situation where photographers (try to) make money out of
> misfortune*.
>
> So when people condemn a photographer for trying to make money out of
> somebody else's misfortune I think we're entitled to ask why they
> condemn it in one case but not in other very similar cases, such as the
> Concorde crash.
>
> I'm not trying to score points or win an argument; I'm genuinely
> interested in trying to find out why people treat such cases
> differently, because the only differences I see are the relative
> anonymity of the Concorde victims, and the lack of a fig-leaf over the
> Earnhardt photographer's greed.
>
> ---
>
> Bob
>
> *I'm not suggesting that is the only motive or the primary motive for
> journalists of course, but it is a necessary part of journalism.
>
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Friday, April 27, 2001, 12:20:17 AM, you wrote:
>
> > Whatever, Bob.
> > Without wanting to come across like Mafud:
> > 1) At what point did this thread become about journalism? Your
> > argument is built around a journalism strawman.
> > 2) What this thread started out as (at least for me) was a
> > distaste for someone trying to make 50 grand (the amount isn't
> > really germaine) off of someones misfortune. No journalistic
> > integrity is involved in an eBay auction.
> > 3) For the record, I am not a motorsport follower, and had not
> > heard of Dale Earnhardt(?) prior to his untimely demise.
> > 4) This is not about journalism, it is about greed.
> > William Robb
>
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
