Rules:
1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer
2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.
3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.
4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.
5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.
Photo of the Week Rule(s):
1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.
2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about
cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/40655145
Photo by Pierre Lavie. Yes this is me. And I threw my Leica. It landed on the bass plate with hardly a scratch. Another photographer grabbed it along with my phone and I was able to track him later. I was held face down tear gas deployed right in front of me and pepper sprayed directly into the eye.
-- John Abernathy
Fuck that's a great pic.
We all love to shit on journalists because most of the time they deserve it, but some of them are honestly doing heroic work and are fundamental in times like these.
And it's also a great case for why photographers have not been made obsolete by AI, but quite literally the opposite.
I'd argue any "journalist" deserving of being shit on are not doing anything that could be described as "journalism"
Yeah this is what I meant, those that smear the profession
There's a reason the press is often referred to as "the fourth branch of government". Journalists that do their job properly are absolutely critical to the proper functioning of a democracy.
no, "we all" don't
"Those that pass themselves as journalists" maybe
Hopefully wins an award.
Which I'm sure Trump will demand he give to him
(but on a less cynical note, I agree, this deserves an award, both for the photographer in the photo and the one who took it)
Photographers and journalists are two separate groups though. Photographers are the admirable ones for collecting facts and putting themselves in actual danger.
Journalists, however, oftentimes take these facts and spin them for ad revenue, political gain, or their own career advancement
I do photography but not really for journalistic documentation, journalists can use photography to do journalism but photography isn't inherently journalism. Some journalists are more biased than others but they're all journalists.
I wouldn't say Fox News hosts are journalists, even though they love to pretend they are. I think they even successfully argued in court that it's an entertainment program so it shouldn't be held to proper ethical standards, yet their audience doesn't take it that way.
That's not a journalist, that's a propagandist
All journalists are propagandists due to the nature of journalism. The decision, conscious or due to ideological alignment, on what facts to emphasize determines the narrative a journalist is promoting.
Last time the US president surprised the press by invading a country without warning, Panama, the first question asked was "were any US soldiers injured". This doesn't require any lies, but it did more to influence the way Americans thought about the surprise war than any lie they could have promoted.
to
is crazy work
Unfortunately they've been one in the same in the US for many years
Could you not? I work for a citizen journalism network and shit like that is incredibly harmful.
Any opinion that's pushed is propaganda, it's not inherently bad.
That's not saying your association is also bad, to the contrary that it's very much needed to fight back against the "journalism" that is complicit or scared