Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/08/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 08:31 PM 7/31/02 -0400, you wrote: >Peter, it's much more simple. Newspaper photography doesn't require >finesse. It just requires pictures. I've seen so many pictures of kids >with bloated bellies and flies, I forget who shot what, and why. I no >longer care. Newspaper photography has upgraded itself into >photojournalism, and along with the name change came a new-found worth. >They now think of themselves as changing the world through their images. >Two problems with that thought are: 1) Photojournalism has changed almost >nothing. (2 Photojournalists are just as apt to be jackasses as bright, >open human beings. What photojournalism has going for it is that it has >become a sacred cow. > >One would be hard pressed to find empirical proof that photojournalism has >had any profound effect on the world. One can find ample proof that art >has profoundly changed the world. One need only look to the 1960s-1970s. >The music, art, and literature played a profound role in changing American >and European culture. It wasn't politics, and it wasn't newspaper >photography. Five years of Disco changed the world more than 90 years of >photojournalism. > >Allan Allan - If photojournalism has made a difference to one person, it has changed the world. I know of many instances when a photograph has moved someone to do something to make a difference. Tina Tina Manley, ASMP http://www.tinamanley.com images available from: http://www.pdiphotos.com http://www.mira.com http://www.agpix.com http://www.newscom.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html