Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Original poster

People who photograph and film the misery and pain of others

123 replies

Bejazzled · 22/03/2017 22:24

Imo are the scum of the earth.
These photos (stills from tv footage) appear to show one man and one woman doing just that rather than offering to help the injured man on the ground.

OP posts:

CactusFred · 23/03/2017 07:14

YANBU

People start filming rather than helping.

Filming this would be the last thing on my mind and I don't understand why people do this.

TheFirstMrsDV · 23/03/2017 07:19

I have issue with a couple of things.
First one is posting the photos in the OP. I know you want to prove a point but you are just perpetuating the very thing you are objecting to.
So what if those photos are generally available, you have just posted them on a massive parenting site.
Secondly is the massive rush to post images and make assumptions about the people in them without any proof.
However shocked and disgusted you are I am pretty sure the people on that bridge are a hell of a lot more shocked and disgusted.
Now they have to deal with accusations of filming an injured man fgs.

As SOON as the news started unravelling, people started posting things like 'people better not be doing [xyz]. It was like they were desperate for others (i.e. not them) to do unspeakable things so they could be outraged by them.

That is just as weird and wrong as people filming and gawping. At least the gawpers have the excuse of horror and trauma. I am not sure what excuse there is for commentators who are no where near the event.

These terrible incidents are supposed to fracture our society. It is what they are for. So by rushing to judge bystanders without proof or context we are colluding with the terrorists.

There will have been wankers around on that day as a PP has pointed out. Why must we look for them?

MaisyPops · 23/03/2017 07:20

They could be calling 999.
The guy with a selfie stick might have not had time to get it away as the attack happened.
People may have recorded things because they thought itbwas a traffic accident or a hit and run so the scene and number plate might be helpful.

I feel very fortunate that Ive not had to witness anything like that so feel its best to reserve judgement.

WateryTart · 23/03/2017 07:20

The police always ask for footage taken by members of the public in the aftermath. Sometimes it's useful.

Difficult. I think they should be helping, of course, but she could have been calling 999.

SoupDragon · 23/03/2017 07:26

OP, what are your opinions of people who post pictures of themisery and pain of others on social media? Do you think they are "the scum of the earth" too?

I can't believe you have the nerve to try and take the moral high ground!

Taking the photos and film footage can help police. Posting it on MN to try and make a flawed moral point, not so much.

KateDaniels2 · 23/03/2017 07:35

I saw some footage on the news. It didnt look like anyone was taking pictures. It looked like they were running for help.

Personally i can't see a selfie stick in those photos however loads of people have them in London. Its not crime as far as i am aware and just having it doesn't mean anything.

FlappinSwazy · 23/03/2017 07:35

The guy with a selfie stick might have not had time to get it away as the attack happened.

The guy with a selfie stick took a photograph into a line of ambulances. It took the FIRST ambulance six minutes to arrive.

Selfie stick man had time to get away.

Catsize · 23/03/2017 07:42

I have mixed views. I was quite shocked by the man on the bridge. However, I agree with the overall principle of taking photographs. My OH is a newspaper editor and has always said you can tell a journalist in an incident like this because they are usually running in the opposite direction of the crowd and getting their camera out as they run.
Footage that was taken in the aftermath of the Lee Rigby murder was invaluable from an evidential perspective if I recall rightly.
Recently, that beautiful rock arc fell into the sea in Gozo. It happened in the night I believe, and one of the most photographed sites in the world has no images of its collapse. I know it's not on a par with the loss of human life, but it seems quite strange that there is no visual recording of such a significant event.

NCISgeek · 23/03/2017 07:42

I have been filmed treated injured and dying people more times than I care to remember. The last time was a young man who was dreadfully injured and the fire brigade had to hold up blankets round me while we cut his trousers off to stop the bastards getting that shot of him half naked for their social media pages.
It makes me so cross but it's not illegal.

FlappinSwazy · 23/03/2017 07:48

can tell a journalist in an incident like this because they are usually running in the opposite direction of the crowd and getting their camera out as they run.

The Reuters journalist was actually on the way to alert staff at Tommy's about the dying man he'd just photographed. He stopped to take more photographs when he realised it was a big deal. Those photographs included a woman pronounced dead lying trapped under the bus.

Please don't try and make out this journalist was running into danger - he ran in the opposite direction and then stopped and took photographs.

Photographs for evidence are a very different kettle of fish to photographs which are shared on social media with no thought for the families and friend's of the dying person / dead person they've just photographed.

Doyouwantabrew · 23/03/2017 08:01

NCI completely and utterly awe your point and cannot imagine anyone then uploading these images and spreading them when relatives not even been informed or without permission.

however as I posted my dds recovery was helped by her seeing images from a traumatic event she was involved in and helped her peice together what happened.

AwaywiththePixies27 · 23/03/2017 08:02

Footage that was taken in the aftermath of the Lee Rigby murder was invaluable from an evidential perspective if I recall rightly.

catsize yes but that wasn't my point. My point was that was the first thing the man thought of. Not just that, my main issue with it and I said so at the time, was that his family would have found our he was dead in the most insensitive way. Someone filming it then it being plastered all over the news channels before the police had even had time to inform them.

Similar frustrated me yesterday when several kept asking if they knew who the PC was and the spokesman clearly saying, several times, yes we do, but we have yet to inform his family. Lots of spouses and families would have been on pins yesterday wondering if it was their hubby or not.

I do get it, especially with journalists and war photographers. Their jobs are to capture it all. I did actually think that any of those were indeed taking photos, they were most probably journalists.

LosingDory · 23/03/2017 08:11

I think the thing is that everything is such a media circus these days. My Facebook feed was flooded with people yesterday all desperate to be the first to post about it, like they'd get some sort of weird kudos for being first to post...

The reuters photographer is an absolute scum bag

Catsize · 23/03/2017 08:13

To be clear, I do not think it is at all appropriate to take selfies or post this stuff on social media. Likewise, the pp who treats such incidents to be met with a barrage of gawkers with cameras. Man on bridge was awful and seemingly taking nothing useful. As someone said upthread, after 9-11, the material coming into our national newspaper offices was hideous. It needed careful editing before publication.

FlappinSwazy · 23/03/2017 08:14

Doyouwant Couldn't your DD have seen that footage / photograph privately though?

I totally get what you are saying by the way in terms of recovery, I just was wondering if there was any other way - maybe this is something we (the UK) need to do going forwards, ensure footage is shared with survivors and families of the victims to help them piece together what happened (if they wanted to view it).

Catsize · 23/03/2017 08:14

Gawpers

TheFirstMrsDV · 23/03/2017 08:15

meanwhile.
This thread with those photographs at the top of every page will be on the internet for ever.
Can the OP really not see the horrible irony?

Tomorrowillbeachicken · 23/03/2017 08:28

I'm sorry but the Reuters guy is a parasite on society... let's hope karma bites him on the butt.

stupidoctopus · 23/03/2017 09:26

I am not condoning sharing of such horrific images. I think it's unnecessary and hurtful to families and friends of those injured or killed.

With social media being so prevalent in our world now, many people who are 'on the scene' or involved in such incidents will genuinely feel that by sharing these in the moment updates, images and videos, they are doing everyone a service. I'm not saying it's right or that sharing for personal gain (likes/shares/whatever) is acceptable. There are some selfish people will do it for those reasons, I'm not talking about them. A lot of people, however, will see it as their duty to let others know what has happened. Particularly when they are in shock and not thinking clearly.
As such, news will spread much quickly and reach many more people.
Before the advent of social media, you may have been lucky to catch a special bulletin (if it was a huge incident), or hear by word of mouth. (I heard about 9/11 from a friends brother who had been listening to the radio before leaving for work. I caught the same bus as him. I wouldn't have known until an hour or so later when I got home otherwise.)
But a lot of the time you'd only know of it when you were somewhere with a tv or radio on. Or got hold of a newspaper.

So yes, I think there is a place for sharing updates as information and as news. I don't think it's right to judge those who do that as, unless you've been in that situation, you've no idea how you will react.

PortiaCastis · 23/03/2017 09:36

On one of the other threads a police officer says that her colleagues are putting a thin blue line as their profile pic on social media.
That speaks loudly and is better than a million trite words or contraversial pics

Deadsouls · 23/03/2017 09:45

Is this not a massive assumption about the motivations of the woman?

PortiaCastis · 23/03/2017 09:49

I hope that I would think about an injured persons family before trying to gain likes on facebrag.

Doyouwantabrew · 23/03/2017 10:06

Flappin yes she eventually did see the images privately but obviously that was before they had been plastered over the daily fail.

It was a good outcome from a callous act I suppose is the way we and she looks at it.

It's going to be how things are now though isn't it as everyone has a pocket camera and video camera. Everyone has immediate access to the internet.

What can we do really.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5