why are photjournalists anonymous?

T

Tuolumne

Mentor
Local time
2:54 AM
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,005
After the assasisnation of Benazir Bhutto I saw a number of astonsihing photos in my local newspaper. One must rank as a candidate for Best of the Year with a man shrieking in grief surrounded by dead bodies, body parts, debris and chaos. This photo must have been taken moments after the explosion occured. The photo was attributed to "Associated Press" while the accompanying article had a real person's byline. This photojournalist captured an amazing and terrible moment and risked his life to do it. Why isn't he/she given any credit for it?

/T
 
I assume the articles written by reporters are also owned by the AP, but they get bylines. So that can't be the only reason. Is this part of the devaluation of the image we are seeing?

/T
 
sitemistic said:
Might have been a AP stringer or a pool photographer. It's not uncommon for there to be no attribution.
Click to expand...

It's funny, I also found the photos from this particular event to be incredibly powerful (especially the pic taken while zooming of the screaming man, perhaps the one the OP was referring to) and I too wondered about who could have taken it.

Sitemistic, I know you're in the business. Has it always been the case that the agencies own the copyright? I thought not. It seems now that with any world event, the photos that are most widely published belong to AP, Reuters, Getty, AFP or one of the other huge libraries or news organisations.

What does this mean for the careers of pro news photographers? Doesn't this system mean that no matter how talented a photographer is or how successful his photos may have been, he might never actually profit from his own work? (Aside from being paid a salary at the time he was working obviously.)


Matthew
 
Pitxu said:
This is one of the reasons why Capa, HCB and the others formed Magnum, in order that the photogs got proper recognition for their work.
Click to expand...

Not so long ago I still saw photographer attributions from AP and UPI. Suddenly it stopped. Why? Have photographers lost so much power. I still don't understand why the reproter gets a byline but not the photographer. If it's a matter of asserting copyright ownership the attribution could say "Photographer's Name copyright AP" or some such.

/T
 
Here is a link to VII Photo Agency founded in 2001 by seven pj's. Like Magnum they share recoginition and their work has been shown in galleries. Perhaps the trend is changing to give more control back to the photographer.

http://www.viiphoto.com/
 
John Moore of Getty Images (if this is the photo you refer to):

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2007/12/27/world/asia/1227-ATTACK_4.html

Otherwise maybe the last photo in the link that gbhill gave you in post #10 above

If other publications do not byline the photographer I would imagine the photo agency would want to follow that up, as well as invoicing them.
 
Last edited:
sitemistic said:
Things are not good for news photographers. I'm glad I'm 30 years into my career instead of looking at starting one as a PJ. It would be a hard decision to do it.
Click to expand...
That's not very reassuring for me. :(
 
Almost every photo I checked on the wires had a photographer's name attached. The only place recently where photogs requested no credit was from Burma where being a pj was kept close to the chest and on a need to know basis. Border control was already cracking down on the various methods methods used to enter the country.
 
why are photjournalists anonymous

why are photjournalists anonymous

As a long-time reporter for one of the best newspapers in the country, I can tell you from personal experience that photo editors at every leading publication and photo agency make a serious effort to credit the photographer of each picture... This is particularly done for exclusive pictures or extraordinary photographs...
 
I do not see a recent decrease in photo credits in the print media, and I look for the photo credits in everything I read. As sitemisitc has said, circumstances very a lot, so there are many reasons why an image may or may not be credited. What HAS changed is that newspapers (and the mega-media companies that own them) are becoming more and more focused on making as much profit as possible, and that often means giving up in-depth reporting or anything that does not appeal to "the lowest common denominator". I do not work for my local paper, which is a major US newspaper in the capital city of my state, but I know many photographers and reporters there. They tell me the management has decreed that the first, second, and third priorities are the web, the web and the web. This is happening all over the country. And for photographers it means getting trained in video and in audio. Things are moving towards the PJ carrying one camera that can generate video AND high-res stills (clips) for publication in the paper edition....
 
Tuolumne said:
After the assasisnation of Benazir Bhutto I saw a number of astonsihing photos in my local newspaper. One must rank as a candidate for Best of the Year with a man shrieking in grief surrounded by dead bodies, body parts, debris and chaos. This photo must have been taken moments after the explosion occured. The photo was attributed to "Associated Press" while the accompanying article had a real person's byline. This photojournalist captured an amazing and terrible moment and risked his life to do it. Why isn't he/she given any credit for it?

/T
Click to expand...

In my paper there was the name of the PJ, B.K Bangash/AP. Strange, isn´t it?
 
Why are photojournalists anonymous?

Why are photojournalists anonymous?

Not on RFF they're not! ;)


.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top