Selling people out

I’m busy reading a book called The Painter of Battles, by Arturo Perez-Reverte. It’s a novel about a famous photographer, who made his name internationally as a war photographer. He’s retired from photography and lives all alone in an abandoned lighthouse. He spends his time painting a huge mural depicting battle scenes. In a way, it’s the photographer’s own therapy – a way of coming to terms with all the violence he’s seen.

One day a man appears. It turns out this man was the subject of one of the photographer’s most famous photographs, when he was a soldier in one of the Balkan conflicts. The man has hunted the photographer down, and now wants to kill him. The reason: that photo, taken in what was for the photographer just a passing moment, has ruined his life. Because of the photo, the soldier was recognized by the enemy, captured and tortured, while his wife and children were killed.

I can’t reveal what happens, as I haven’t yet finished the book – and anyhow I wouldn’t want to ruin it for anyone who might read it for themselves. But the book raises interesting and difficult issues around the ethics of journalism in general, and photography in particular. These days, when digital cameras are everywhere (most cell-phones have basic cameras these days), and with the push of a button one can upload one’s photos to the Internet for potentially millions to see, what are the dangers, and what are our responsibilities? What are the potential threats to privacy?

If you are a member of Facebook, you may have had the experience where one of your friends uploads a photo of you for all the world to see – one that you would rather not have on the Internet – either because you are in a rather compromising situation, or because you just don’t think it shows you at your best. If your friend won’t agree to remove the photo, there’s not very much you can do about it.

What’s the problem with this? Well, it’s been reported that employers these days are starting to use Facebook to do background research on potential employees. If you have a job interview lined up, and your potential employer comes across several photos of you rather drunk at a party, that puts you at a disadvantage and may disqualify you for the job altogether – all before you’ve had a chance to put your case.

And what about other situations – gays and lesbians for example, who haven’t come out to friends and family, and are photographed in a way that ‘outs’ them (marching in a gay pride parade for example). Or how about undocumented migrants who are photographed and displayed and clearly identified online, exposing them to possible arrest and deportation?

The easy answer is: make sure you always have permission from the subjects, first to take a photo, and secondly to upload it onto the Internet (such as onto the CJA portal). And in the case of children, get permission from parents or guardians and make sure children are not placed in vulnerable positions or exploited in any way. But is this enough? When someone gives permission for photos to be taken and used, do they really know enough about how that photo might get used, and the life the photo might take on, to make an informed choice? For example, there are many examples of people who allowed themselves to be interviewed for news or feature stories, only to be dismayed once they saw how they were reflected in the journalist’s eyes. The South African author, Jonny Steinberg, in his book Midlands, writes about how the subject of the book, a farmer who lost his son in a farm murder, was dismayed to see how he was reflected in the pages of the book. This was after he knowingly and willingly opened up to the author. I am also reminded of that famous (infamous?) photo by Kevin Carter, of a vulture eyeing a starving child. The other day I saw the same photo, covering a tin can soliciting donations for a charity, at my local convenience store. Is that legitimate, or exploitative use of this very controversial image?

The American writer, Joan Didion, wrote in her famous essay, Slouching Towards Bethlehem, that "writers are always selling someone out". Is this even more so for photographers, since images seem to be so much more powerful than words? Can we be sure, that in our efforts to expose injustice and report on human rights issues as Citizen Journalists, we are not doing the same?