To think that pic of the bare-tummied lady should not have been used?

[Chestnut99]

I am appalled at how many newspapers and websites have used the pic of the poor lady in an open yellow jacket/blouse who is sitting on a bench, dazed and in shock with her buttons blown off and her bra and tummy showing (Evening Standard yesterday, front page of today's Times etc etc). The least we can do for a victim of hideous terrorist attacks is respect her dignity, not plaster her over the media.

The Daily Mail has gone one further by finding a reason to repeat the pic today in a special "human interest" article naming her and telling us what her job is.

I would be utterly appalled if my own state of traumatised shock was taken advantage of in the same way, before I had come round and realised I was half dressed and showing my underwear. Shame on them all.

I'm not going to link to the pic because that will just make it worse. I am not usually particularly outspoken but I have complained to IPSO - //www.ipso.co.uk - about this because it intrudes on her privacy and her shock.

Poor woman - and poor Belgium

[AdoraBell]

Did they Jean? I don't know how I missed it then, but I am glad I did. I had to keep looking away because of another image that even now is still making me cry.

[wiltingfast]

I don't blame the photographer. She was there. She did what she does best. She did what journalists do. She probably has way worse on the camera which will never see print.

It is the editorial decision to use it that is at fault here. Near universal too.

[Lighteningirll]

I agree it's a massive invasion of privacy by the photographer and a poor decision by editors and I had the same sense of wtf with the couple hugging that poor man on the floor.

[opioneers]

I think I actually blame the photographer much less: she was there, in shock, just doing what she does. The invasion of privacy only happens when the photograph is published, so the people responsible are the picture desk/editors.

[Belikethatthen]

Yes saw the journalist on the news and she explained she was in shock and she couldn't help as she is a journalist not a doctor.

I did feel the same as most others on here when I saw the photo yesterday but I must say I didn't consciously notice the bare stomach, more that she was shocked, dishevelled and bloodied.

[guerre]

Journalists are there to report. That's their job. That said, I have never yet met a journalist that I truly liked.

I always think of Kevin Carter whenever people raise the ethics of journalists not pitching in in these situations.

[guerre]

Sorry, on the issue about this lady- yes, when I saw the photograph yesterday morning, I was shocked, as she was clearly in her underwear, and not in any fit state to assent to photographs. I hope she's making a swift recovery.

[InionEile]

Haven't seen the photo in question but I totally agree that it is exploitative to photo someone jn a vulnerable state and plaster that image all over global media.

These days I hold media photographers and publishers to a very low standard however. After that Dutch airline was shot down over Ukraine and some media saw fit to plaster photos of the dead bodies and passenger luggage, including children's toys, all over the papers, I lost all hope.

[RedToothBrush]

Totally agree - a decent human's response would be to offer her some cover up and some water. Snapping photos instead is self-serving fuckerdom

Disagree completely. There is huge importance in photo journalism of really appalling circumstances - not just this event.

Photojournalism provide evidence through the lens of a camera that focuses the attention of the world to real horror and suffering rather than sanitising the world or allowing it to ignore problems that our outside our bubble. The camera is a witness to history. It is far more powerful that a witness statement or a written description.

The decision to publish - and when - is another matter. Sometimes it is inappropriate to publish immediately but with the passage of time holds great value in telling the story that otherwise would not be told. Sometimes it is appropriate. But I don't have a problem with the existence of the photo in the first place.

There have been numerous war journalists who have suffered physically and mentally in bringing news to the world. I would not assume that its self serving to report. In fact I would argue the photographer is more likely to receive abuse, some of which is displayed in this thread. Indeed the fate of Kevin Carter highlights perfectly how it is rarely self serving and a career path looking for glory and bonus payday.

What SHOULD the journalist have done instead, if she is not medically trained? She did what she thought would help most ultimately and what she thought her value was in that particular situation. How you react in a situation like that is also not always the most logical, rational or what you would have done if you relived the moment with the benefit of hindsight.

I have the upmost respect for photo journalists of this type. The world would probably be even darker without them.

What I find far more disgusting is displayed on this thread, with women making comments about the body shape of a woman in distress. That is far more shameful and disrespectful than the intent of the photographer in my book.

[Hannahfftl]

Regarding the couple embracing and ignoring the man, there is another photo presumably taken a few moments later from another angle where they are helping the man lying behind them.
The woman with her bra exposed to the world's media probably doesn't care right now. But that still doesn't make it okay to expose someone in that much distress and disarray!

[WhoTheFuckIsSimon]

I remember 20 years ago the editor of Climber magazine was sacked because he published a photo of an old, half mummified body which had been spat out by a glacier on Everest. How times have changed!

[RedToothBrush]

"I was shouting “Doctor! Doctor! Doctor! And no one was there ... What do you do in this situation if you’re a journalist? Help? Ask doctor to come? Or take a photo?” she said, pausing to compose herself. "In that very moment, I realized that to show the world what was happening in this moment of terror, a photo was more important."

For now, Kardava is safe, but she spoke with a shaky voice, repeating "I was not able to help them." She said she doesn't know how she will carry on with her career as a photojournalist.

"How can I go to the airport next time? We are journalists. We are fearless, right? Time will come, and it will be necessary for me to go to the same airport and leave from the same metro station where the second explosion was. How can I take the metro and go to the airport? How can I go to the very place I felt such terrible things. I don't know. I don't know."

[lorelei9]

Fucking journalists
This is one of many reasons why we need a privacy law
Wonder what she's doing with the money she makes from it

Couldn't do anything other than take a picture, so much bollocks. She could have left if she didn't feel useful enough to even hold someone's hand while waiting for help. Vultures. I had hoped this would be gone from media after the immediate aftermath but no. I will complain.

[PortobelloRoad]

They shouldn't take pictures of anyone in that situation, not just people who were a bit exposed.

"I realized that to show the world what was happening in this moment of terror, a photo was more important."

That is the most self serving bullshit I have ever heard, what an absolute cunt. How about holding their hand, soothing them, trying to make sure they doesn't have any un noted serious injuries or go into shock, just talk to them? Even if it's just one person. Jesus Christ.

[Evenstar]

I agree completely that you don't need medical training to offer comfort to another human being, my thought on seeing the interview with this journalist was that someone could have been dying or losing consciousness and may have been aware that someone was photographing them rather offering comfort

[Southernlassie]

lorelei9

How do you think news is found, uncovered, reported on? How do you think you see pictures on tv/social media?

Journalists do things others would not to shine a light on issues, I find your comments so disrespectful

I don't think she made money off the photo. its her job. Journalists are vocational people. We take pictures of dark moments.

I'm not voyeristic, I know how to do my job. And if we didn't, the population would say 'why are we hearing nothing about these attacks'

[PortobelloRoad]

Southernlassie

Why can't you take pictures of everything but the people? These things aren't cleaned up straight away, you can take pictures of the aftermath and other aspects.

You ARE voyeuristic, my childhood was plagued by people like you sticking cameras in instead of helping. Those "dark moments" are the worst days of peoples lives. Have some empathy for fucks sake. If something awful happened to you and someone took pictures while it was happening, you would probably not feel the same.

It's not about the not making money, it's about being a decent human being. You are absolutely not doing the right thing taking a picture when there is someone suffering in front of you. I don't know how people like you sleep at night.

I find your comments so disrespectful

And the people you take pictures of find it disrespectful but give a fuck right? You got your snap and your boss is happy, career furthered and on to the next one. Well done you for doing all of us such a service

[lorelei9]

Southern, how do I think info is gathered? I know from personal experience that if you lose loved ones in a terrorist attack, the press will hound you at your home, at your workplace, at memorials, which may be being held as "memorials" because there are no pieces of a body to put in a coffin at a funeral.

I was out for dinner tonight with someone who dealt with that situation along side me. We were saying how much we ignore now because you've been on the receiving end of that, you learn not to buy newspapers generally but especially not on days like this.

There are ways to report sensitively and decently. Sadly they are very rarely used. A pp mentioned what happened with a plane crash, I didn't see it but I heard about it.

I will keep using the term "vultures" till I see evidence that some sensitivity is being employed.

Don't get me started on the Leveson whitewash.

[lorelei9]

Portobello, indeed, the lack of humanity displayed by these people is astounding. But the thing is, like every nasty piece of work, they sleep at night because they convince themselves they are in the right.

[GiddyOnZackHunt]

If taking pictures to report on stuff is what you do then I can accept your gut reaction is to document.
That doesn't absolve you of editorial ability when submitting your pictures for publication.
The media also need to use some judgement about what images they use. The BBC reporter at the airport sounded excited when a bus of injured people arrived. As the camera panned in to the bus, I turned off.
Whether I was a size 6 or 26, I wouldn't want to be on the front pages of newspapers with my underwear and stomach on show.
Public curiousity doesn't outweigh private citizen's right to privacy.

[PortobelloRoad]

But the thing is, like every nasty piece of work, they sleep at night because they convince themselves they are in the right.

Quite. Zero empathy.

[lorelei9]

Giddy, please start talking to your local MP about a privacy law, because as things stand there is no protection at all against the curiosity of the public and the ways of those who make a living from feeding it.

[GiddyOnZackHunt]

My local MP is a cherub cheeked Tory on the make. My track record with him isn't good :)

[ohtheholidays]

I thought exactly the same the poor women she looked completely lost I'm sure having a picture like that of her self plastered all over the place was the last thing she needed.