State of photojournalism

[OmerV]

A well written, thought provoking essay on the state of photojournalism in the digital era, and to a lesser degree on photography in general.

The author starts by giving a date to the beginning of photojournalism which can be debated but it is a quibble. It just facilitates framing the essay into a manageable space.

By way of The Online Photographer:

https://witness.worldpressphoto.org/photojournalisms-first-century-79645873e363

[RSL]

Interesting stuff, Omer. Unfortunately it's a bottomless argument.

[OmerV]

Interesting stuff, Omer. Unfortunately it's a bottomless argument.

Well Russ, I guess photojournalism in your part of the country is good and thriving, but here in Tucson it is a ghost of what it was.

The conglomerate news media owners are responsible and the sad part is that most folks seem not to care. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Too long.

It usually helps one’s post to quote a paragraph that encapsulares the point.

[RSL]

Well Russ, I guess photojournalism in your part of the country is good and thriving, but here in Tucson it is a ghost of what it was.

The conglomerate news media owners are responsible and the sad part is that most folks seem not to care.

I think real photojournalism died back in the days when the great mags like Life and Look went tits up. It's never been able to recover. In a lot of ways, WW II was the apex. Photojournalism during that period was a mountain that overshadowed everything that followed. I still remember riding my bike down the streets in the middle of the night loaded with copies of the Detroit News, yelling "Extra... extra... read all about it." The photographers who covered that war, guys like Gene Smith, were giants who made their followers look like midgets. Though there were later revivals: things like HCB's coverage of Ghandi's funeral. But it was all downhill from there.

[OmerV]

I think real photojournalism died back in the days when the great mags like Life and Look went tits up. It's never been able to recover. In a lot of ways, WW II was the apex. Photojournalism during that period was a mountain that overshadowed everything that followed. I still remember riding my bike down the streets in the middle of the night loaded with copies of the Detroit News, yelling "Extra... extra... read all about it." The photographers who covered that war, guys like Gene Smith, were giants who made their followers look like midgets. Though there were later revivals: things like HCB's coverage of Ghandi's funeral. But it was all downhill from there.

I disagree, Russ, but it may not matter now. Still, I'm sure younger photogs will find a way to interest people on photojournalism again, even if the likes of you and I don't recognize it as such.

Too long.

It usually helps one’s post to quote a paragraph that encapsulares the point.

But Slobodan, you're not running the show.   

[Patricia Sheley]

There was the largely unknown by name, Ernest Withers, but those indelible Till era memories likely would not exist outside of the Memphis area without his photojournalist work. Yet, and I'm also feeling, that may be in part because he himself was black; his work was passionately excellent.

[OmerV]

There was the largely unknown by name, Ernest Withers, but those indelible Till era memories likely would not exist outside of the Memphis area without his photojournalist work. Yet, and I'm also feeling, that may be in part because he himself was black; his work was passionately excellent.

I had not heard of Ernest Withers until now. And you are correct Patricia, his work is very good(looked him up.) The cut of photojournalism job opportunities may, unfortunately, impact "minorities" and women in particular.

[petermfiore]

The cut of photojournalism job opportunities may, unfortunately, impact "minorities" and women in particular.

How is that? Curious why you see it that way. To me it's a universal issue.

Peter

[jeremyrh]

I think real photojournalism died back in the days when the great mags like Life and Look went tits up. It's never been able to recover. In a lot of ways, WW II was the apex. Photojournalism during that period was a mountain that overshadowed everything that followed. I still remember riding my bike down the streets in the middle of the night loaded with copies of the Detroit News, yelling "Extra... extra... read all about it." The photographers who covered that war, guys like Gene Smith, were giants who made their followers look like midgets. Though there were later revivals: things like HCB's coverage of Ghandi's funeral. But it was all downhill from there.

As I mentioned elsewhere, there is a new exhibition here in London of the work of Don McCullin. I don't see him as a "midget" in any sense.

[RSL]

Hi Jeremy,

The problem with war coverage is that war on the ground is always the same. I see McCullin doing a rerun of Gene Smith's rough, dirty-looking soldier, and I realize MdCullin isn't trying to ape Smith; he's simply recording what's there. But the Gene Smith picture that sticks in my mind is the one of the Marine holding the dying baby. I've never seen another combat photographer produce anything as striking and heartrending as that one.

[OmerV]

How is that? Curious why you see it that way. To me it's a universal issue.

Peter

If you are suggesting by 'universal issue' as being inclusive without exception of gender and race, then, if only you were right. The revelations last year of abuse by photographers suggests our industry is too slow in acknowledging its homogenized hegemony. Of course there are exceptions, yet even here at LuLa, women are woefully under represented.

NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa. That issue deserves its own separate Coffee Corner forum topic.

[petermfiore]

If you are suggesting by 'universal issue' as being inclusive without exception of gender and race, then, if only you were right. The revelations last year of abuse by photographers suggests our industry is too slow in acknowledging its homogenized hegemony. Of course there are exceptions, yet even here at LuLa, women are woefully under represented.

NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa. That issue deserves its own separate Coffee Corner forum topic.

Universal means all...At least in my world it does.

Peter

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa...

Don't think of an elephant... don't think of an elephant... don't think of an elephant...

The solutions is simple, really. From now on, all posts on LuLa must be 50% by women. Voila!

[Jeremy Roussak]

The solutions is simple, really. From now on, all posts on LuLa must be 50% by women. Voila!

I foresee difficulties with enforcement, Slobodan. Alternate words, perhaps?

Jeremy

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

The solutions is simple, really. From now on, all posts on LuLa must be 50% by women. Voila!

I believe that half of my genetic material was supplied by a person of the female persuasion.
Does that mean I'm qualified to comment?   

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Alternate words, perhaps?

Alternate worlds?

[Rob C]

I detest the idea of quotas; please don't even joke about it!

[jeremyrh]

Hi Jeremy,

The problem with war coverage is that war on the ground is always the same. I see McCullin doing a rerun of Gene Smith's rough, dirty-looking soldier, and I realize MdCullin isn't trying to ape Smith; he's simply recording what's there. But the Gene Smith picture that sticks in my mind is the one of the Marine holding the dying baby. I've never seen another combat photographer produce anything as striking and heartrending as that one.

Well, maybe Mcullin would agree with you. From today's paper, in interview with DM and Giles Duley:

Looking to the future of photography now, we are a culture saturated in images: are mobile phones and Instagram a menace?

DMcC Not a menace at all. Take the white helmets who risked their lives in Syria: phones were the only means of us getting information out. Photojournalism has had its day, though. When did you last see a really serious great set of pictures? Newspapers, even great newspapers, they’re almost running tabloid-type material of film stars and footballers and crap like that.

GD Photojournalism has died because the outlets are just not there, but photography has evolved into something else. Citizen journalism is great. It’s great that anyone can take a picture. “Image fatigue” is a phrase that gets used a lot, but I don’t think it’s true that people cannot still feel the impact of an image. You put me into a school, which I love, and I show one photograph and tell the story and you’ll see these 15-year-old kids in tears. It’s not that people have lost the ability to take imagery in, it’s that they see so much and out of context. But if you [look at] it in the right space, let people have that time, then a black-and-white photograph, with those eyes, somebody looking at you, it has the same impact it has always had.

[Telecaster]

Yes, I think self-expression and documentation will always find effective ways to "get out there." Concerning photojournalism, if newspapers & magazines are in decline and their online versions are compromised by clickbaiting & other forms of predatory marketeering, the good stuff will be shared elsewhere. Imagine some 21st century version of samizdat, used to say & show the things governments and corporations would rather keep silent & hidden. Well, no need to imagine it…

-Dave-