Documentary and social reform

Having read though Martha Rosler’s 1981 essay ‘In, Around and Afterthoughts (on documentary photography) I highlighted a few key points that piqued my interest.

It states/ implies that photographers such as Riis and Margaret Sanger were destined to spark interest in the privileged, to highlight the poverty and crime etc. that threatened their society and called them to action to protect themselves. It goes on to suggest that

Charity is an argument for the preservation of wealth, and reformist documentary (like the appeal for free and compulsory education) represented an argument within a class about the need to give a little in order to mollify the dangerous classes below,

It widened the distance between class as the priveliged bestowed charity rather than assisting in self help / support for those shown as underprivileged. The priviged felt safer knowing that the lower classes relied on their hand-outs as it put them in a position of power. The images also serve to reassure the classes of their standing in society.

The essay also suggests that documentary photography is more comfortable with moralism than with revolutionary politics.

In reference to images from the Bowery it labels it as victim photography, the subjects becoming victims of the camera / photographer. Photographing the realities of the people and poverty did nothing to help them it only served to expose them. Could the iconic image of the migrant mother be seen as such? Was Florence Thompson a victim of Dorothea Lange? The image did provide change in the form of aid however Florence herself was never the direct recipient of aid or monetary gain from the image, in fact she had apparently tried to get the photo suppressed.

The essay really does depict Documentary photography as a social class tool, it states,

Documentary, as we know it, carries (old) information about a group of powerless people to another group addressed as socially powerful.

 

Documentary testifies, finally, to the bravery or (dare we name it?) the manipulativeness and savvy of the photographer, who entered a situation of physical danger, social restrictedness, human decay, or combinations of these and saved us the trouble.

No-one wants to experience or witness certain events first hand, we prefer to view from a safe distance and it could be argued that it is our desire to remain safe as well as personal detachment that creates a need for documentary in which ever form. Be it rumours, tales, images or videos, even way back in history when Kings and Queens wanted to discover new lands they did not choose to seek these for themselves, they sent explorers who would come back and tell of what they had found. They remained safe in ‘their’ land , detached from the dangers that the explorer faced whilst documenting new lands.

Another interesting point was regarding the image taken by Elliot Erwitt http://www.elliotterwitt.com/lang/en/index.html

It was taken for the French office of tourism and has in fact since been re-taken and used in a Visa advertisement as well as retaken in different countries with a slightly different final image. What I found interesting however is that although Erwitt is considered a documentary photographer this image was in fact staged. It was an image of his driver and his drivers nephew and took them at least 30 times of pedalling back and forth to capture this image. It brings in to question the authenticity of images and what we the viewer do not know and are not shown regarding the scene displayed before us in an image. We only see what the photographer has chosen to keep within the four walls of the frame.

The essay also goes on to suggest that a documentary image has two moments, the first being the immediate moment in which it is caught or in regards to the above image created. It is a document for that moment in time. The second moment is the historical moment, the awareness of the time period it was taken and the social and historical understanding of that time period.

This leads to the arguments over the photographers involvement and ownership of this transient moment , If it becomes an object of art are they  victimizing their subject by exploiting their moments of weakness, pain or poverty. If the Migrant mother image had only been used as a document to bring help to these people would Florence Thompson have tried to suppress the image or was it only after it became such an iconic image and viewed in the realm of art?

Eyewitnesses? continuation

 

Having re-read my first entry on eyewitnesses I am not 100% sure it meets the questions fully. They are not examples which highlight or expose abuses of power. It was while I was thinking about this that I thought of North Korea. Very little emerges from North Korea as the price to be paid for breaking the rules appears to be high.

Citizen journalism that does emerge from North Korea is extremely important for a number of reasons:

1. It is a difficult area to access for press and photographers.
2. To educate the world to the true plight of North Koreans.
3. To highlight its dictatorship.

I did discover that there is a magazine about North Korea written by North Koreans called Rimjin-gang. The publishing company is based in Japan and uses undercover citizen journalists from within North Korea to provide photographs and video footage. As important this work is in spreading the news I can’t help but feel how ethical it is to put citizens in danger?

http://www.asiapress.org/rimjin-gang/ Accessed 13.08.17

Here is the excerpt from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rimjingang) Accesses 13.08.17

In 2007, Asia Press began publishing a magazine entitled Rimjin-gang: News from Inside North Korea in Korean and Japanese. It was started by a Japanese and Korean co-joint editorial group, a chief editor and Japanese journalist, Jiro Ishimaru, and a Korean representative editor, Choi Jin I, author and North Korean defector.

Rimjingang secretly operates with journalists and reporters hidden within North Korea. The magazine aims to bring outside news to the people of North Korea. The reporters, North Korean civilians and defectors who receive media training in China from the Asia Press North Korea reporting team, are able to use techniques such as hidden cameras to create their articles. Reporters learn journalistic principles as well as personal computer skills.

After the fourth issue of the Korean edition was released, Choi Jin I left the group and began releasing her own periodical called Imjingang in the Korean language in Seoul in April 2009.

One of the major reasons for the “divergence” was said to be that Imjingang intended to be rather a communication tool for defectors and North Koreans while Rimjingang aspires to be a project purely for journalistic activities and to foster journalists and journalism in North Korea. Since then, Choi Jin I has made Imjingang a completely independent magazine, which is no longer connected with Asia Press. Rimjingang, published in Japanese/English, in Japan and Imjingang published in South Korea are no longer related.

Rimjingang’s reports are smuggled out of North Korea via China and printed in Japan. Their pictures and footage have been delivered to major newspapers and magazines all over the world, such as The Washington Post, The Economist, The Nation, The Wall Street Journal, and the Japan Times. Rimjingang’s reports were quoted by the New York Times and Newsweek magazine. For TV, it was aired on various stations such as BBC (UK), Channel 4 (UK), KBS (South Korea), ARD (Germany), Al-Jazeera (Arabic Satellite), ABC (Australia), TBS and TV-Asahi (Japan), PBS (United States), etc.

In 2010, the magazine published a video of a woman foraging for food in North Korea which received worldwide attention.^[1]

Currently, the Japanese edition of the magazine is published periodically. In October 2010, Rimjingang released its first English hardcover edition.^[2]

The name Rimjingang is also the North Korean name for the Imjin River, which crosses the demilitarized zone and flows into South Korea from the North. One of the magazine’s North Korean journalists chose this name to symbolize sending the thoughts of the North Korean people to their brothers and sisters in the South

Many of the videos and images on the site appear to have been taken using a hidden camera, they do not seem professional and are poor quality, although the people taken them have received instructions. Indeed they must have been provided with these hidden cameras, I cant imagine they are readily available in North Korea or that they have improvized with a standard camera. This to me is the true definition of Citizen Journalism, allowing us the viewer to witness something that we may ordinarily not be able to see. To ‘put us in the picture’. These images and videos are however completely bias, they are taken to show us ‘the viewer’ the dictatorship in North Korea and the extent of the problems that the North Koreans face. It is designed to educate us ‘the world’ and to weaken the hold of the dictatorship. Not one image shows a positive for the North Korean regime or the positive sides to the way in which many of them ‘the elite’ live, we are offered a filtered view.

In an article by Joanna Chiu in 2010 Lee Jun an undercover citizen journalist for Rimjingang states:

‘Even if we are eventually caught I believe that we will not regret that’s we’ve done. No matter how much I think about it, we are working for justice’

The full article can be seen here:

https://www.thenation.com/article/north-koreas-citizen-journalism/ (Accessed 13.08.17)

A search on YouTube will reveal many videos and news articles surrounding Yeonomi Park, a defector from North Korea. Her family was one of the elite members in North Korea until her father’s arrest so initially lived a privileged life, she escaped with her family into China and then to South Korea where they are now safe. She appears to regularly speak out in order to educate people and to perhaps offer an insight into why the North Koreans accept to live the life they do. Who are we to presume they are unhappy in their dictatorship? In many images they are seen living a seemingly normal life, enjoying horse-riding and swimming etc.  The citizen journalism we are exposed to has made us see the pictures in a different light, we are slowly coming to understand that North Koreans have been ‘brain washed’, they have lived their whole lives with only one truth and they believe and trust in their leadership.

A video explaining this can be viewed here:

Yeonomi’s full story video can be seen here:

Our coursework asks me to write a list of arguments for and against ‘citizen journalism’, I think that this changes based on the story being told. In my previous responses I looked at Grenfell, these images would inform us and didn’t really try too hard to co-erse an opinion. These images of North Korea are to help us empathise and to educate us, willing and asking us to take a stance.

For:

It is taken ‘in the moment’ from an insider’s view which can reveal information that we would not ordinarily have access to / be witness to.

It is real , un-staged and current, adding the missing pieces to normal news coverage, it can help to spread important messages and highlight concerns.

Against:

As in the above example in can be bias, it does not offer both sides as it is taken from a personal viewpoint.

Can be unreliable as there is no governance to ensure it is genuine, can be misinterpreted.

It still relies on media for it to be shared, where it has the potential to be altered or doctored for its purpose and also put into an alternative context.

Can endanger the lives of the citizen journalist, are they exploited?

 

 

Eyewitnesses?

Find some examples of news stories where ‘citizen journalism’ has exposed or highlighted abuses of power.
How do these pictures affect the story, if at all? Are these pictures objective? Can pictures ever be objective?
Write a list of the arguments for and against. For example, you might argue that these pictures do have a degree of objectivity because the photographer (presumably) didn’t have time to ‘pose’ the subjects, or perhaps even to think about which viewpoint to adopt. On the other hand, the images we see in newspapers may be selected from a series of images and how can we know the factors that determined the choice of final image?
Think about objectivity in documentary photography and make some notes in your learning log before reading further.

The concept of citizen journalism (also known as public , participatory , democratic , guerrilla or street journalism) is based upon public citizens playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing, and disseminating news and information. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism – Accessed 09.08.2017)

Objectivity is a central philosophical concept, related to reality and truth, which has been variously defined by sources. Generally, objectivity means the state or quality of being true even outside of a subject’s individual biases, interpretations, feelings, and imaginings. A proposition is generally considered objectively true when its truth conditions are met without biases caused by feelings, ideas, opinions, etc., of a sentient subject. A second, broader meaning of the term refers to the ability in any context to judge fairly, without partiality or external influence. This second meaning of objectivity is sometimes used synonymously with neutrality. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_(philosophy) – Accessed 09.08.17)

I struggled to find an example highlighting abuses of power, however I have found examples of citizen journalism which shows two sides to the story.

Social media allows for the rapid spread of news and information in lightning quick time. Growing up breaking news was in the form of a news flash on the bottom of the TV, a break in radio broadcasting or the late edition of the newspapers, now it is mere minutes before social media profiles are being updated, videos uploaded and the public responds. An interesting fact that I found (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/24/how-social-media-is-reshaping-news/)(Accessed 09.08.17) although based around 2014 states that 50% of social media users share news articles, images or videos, 46% discuss these, 14% post a photograph they took of a news event and 12% post a video they took of a news event. That’s a staggering number of public adding photos and video to news worthy events.

So many news stories fuel public opinion and often it is the relaying of information which determines which side people choose to take. I am a Libran so I naturally look at both sides of every story and I am always aware that there are many different ways of viewing the same story.

Most recently was the extremely sad story of Charlie Gard and his family, a tragic moment in the life of this family. Great Ormond Street and the judicial system were seen as the villains, photos of little Charlie Gard were everywhere , his image being shared repeatedly in an outpouring of love and anger. Public opinion was that the parents should be able to choose to help their son, It was an extremely emotive case with no real positive outcome. I was aware there were other facts that painted a very different light on the chain of events (https://reaction.life/charlie-gard-facts/) Accessed 09.08.17. This highlights that the press are instrumental in formulating public opinion but the rise of social media is what is now the greatest power. In this example the press disseminated the news and information without much objectivity I feel. however the public, shared and disseminated this further and took a very strong stance in their feelings. Even Donald Trump appeared to use the story to ingratiate himself with the British public, he had been concerned about the way he had been perceived as a womanizer to the British public so this was an opportunity for good publicity instead of negative. Images abounded of little Charlie Gard which tugged at heart strings alongside images of his anguished parents, there were no images of anguished medical staff.

Grenfell Tower

This story was of particular interest to me as my husband is a London Fire-fighter and was on duty the night of the fire. He was on stand by to attend however was never called, his station is much further away, a number of our friends however did attend the fire.

Many of the initial images and footage of the fire were clearly taken using mobile phones by members of the public, news spreads a tiny bit slower in the dead of the night however only slowed by minutes. Pretty soon personal images were being used by the Press and News agencies and the iconic image of the tower was etched onto everyone’s minds. You only had to look on social media or open up sky news to see photos and videos of the fire engines arriving, the tower ablaze, people at windows waiting to be rescued.

One iconic image taken was of someone I know, It appears to show a firefighter, in tears, overwhelmed and anguished.

http://metro.co.uk/217/06/14/fire-crews-will-be-at-grenfell-tower-all-through-the-night-6709172/ – Accessed 09.08.2017

Although every firefighter that attended that blaze would obviously feel anguished and traumatized the actual moment this image was taken he had simply poured water over his face and was wiping it from his eyes. Not quite the firefighter crying in anguish it was portrayed as.

Another image that had a very different story behind it…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4607180/Firefighters-told-label-kit-case-never-came-out.html – Accessed 09.08.17

The story that the image portrays is exactly true, firefighters that had exited the building was resting before returning to the blaze. Temperatures were extremely high and many of these firefighters had worked through the night, one firefighter I know had started at 8pm, didn’t finish until 7pm the next day and was back on duty an hour later at 8pm!. It is physically draining work and this image was shown alongside headings labelling them as hero’s and singing their praises. Talking with firefighters they have spoken about the crowd in fact jeering them and telling them to get back in, the crowd shouting at them to say they were letting people die when in fact they were working beyond usual human capability to try to save lives.

Many images of Grenfell were shared via social media and public outrage at the council and the government was fuelled. Demonstration’s and protests were held in Westminster and the public were made aware of social action groups that had been warning that such an atrocity had been waiting to happen. It became a war against the class system rather than direct finger-pointing at the cladding companies or the manufacturer of the fridge that caught light. Video footage of the protests in Westminster showed a photographer being removed from the crowd by the police and the demonstrators calling the police terrorists!

In fact a man was arrested for sharing images he had taken of a body at the scene. He had posted a video as well as two images of a body bag with the man inside and then more images followed showing the victims face and body. According to an article in the Telegraph he said he had shown the photos to show how the victim was being treated and how it had been left unattended. I would presume that the enormity of the fire meant that efforts were concentrated on saving life and I would guess in usual circumstances a coroner would collect the body however no vehicle would have got close given the number of appliances and ambulances that were on the scene.

The article can be seen here: (Accessed 09.08.17)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/16/man-jailed-sharing-photo-dead-grenfell-tower-fire-victim-facebook/

I do not believe that photographs are ever truly objective, the photographer may not have time to pose a photograph but the context in which it is presented will have a particular leaning. As members of the public we are only presented with a ‘chosen’ view via the press however social media can sometimes balance out the viewpoint and shown a different side to events. Many people when they hear of a tragedy log on to social media to find out more rather than the news it would seem.

No-one truly remains on the fence or impassive to events, it must be very difficult for a documentary photographer to remain truly objective. There is always a choice in how a photograph is viewed as well as presented and the information that runs along side it. The angle of the photograph, what is left in the frame or what is left out of the frame , how it is cropped, presentation are all conscious decisions that effect the final outcome.