We are ALL better than this!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- Its time we had a conversation about the content we're producing. What we make as RUclipsrs, what we put on websites and how we react to this content. We have a responsibility. Photography is a beautiful thing, but we need to start being more responsible when we talk about it.
Subscribe to Jaron Schneider here: / @broaderfocus
Index:
04:14 What Is Investigative Journalism?
09:40 In Defense of Steve McCurry and the Afghan Girl
12:49 Why sourcing is important
15:47 What was McCurry accused of?
19:25 What is a Hit Job?
20:55 What if something unethical did happen?
23:21 What is a redaction?
24:32 The responsibility of websites
27:35 The Problem with RUclips
30:49 RUclips pays very little - you NEED views
34:33 Its okay to be wrong
35:26 The Monster RUclips Has Created
37:40 Its okay to be wrong - but own it
39:02 Influencers have responsibility
40:58 What viewers need to do
45:10 That time Ted almost quit RUclips
49:18 We all have a responsibility
On my channel you will find videos about photography, cinematography, post processing tutorials for Capture One, Lightroom and Photoshop, photo assignments that YOU can participate in, the Artist Series and more. The Artist Series is an ongoing set of videos I produce as documentaries on living photographers. I am extremely passionate about photography and video and my goal in making these videos is to share my passion and enthusiasm with you! Don’t forget to subscribe and make sure to hit the like button and share this video if you enjoyed it!
Ted Forbes
The Art of Photography
2830 S. Hulen, Studio 133
Fort Worth, TX 76109
US of A
Only facts matter, not emotions and feelings, beliefs, etc.... and Tonys video is full of undeniable errors:
Tony states that McCurry entered the school and approached Gula without permission. This is contrary to McCurry's version in which the teacher invited him to enter, gave permission for him to photograph the girls and was with McCurry the whole time.
Tony states that McCurry violated Gula's cultural prohibition against a girl 8-years of age or older from being in a room with an adult male who is not a family member, from showing her face to an adult male and from making direct eye contact with an adult male. This is contrary to McCurry's version in which he states that such prohibitions apply to adolescent girls but not to younger children. Gula is on the record saying she was 10 at the time of the photo. And to reiterate, McCurry's version of the facts is that the teacher gave permission for and was present during the shoot.
Tony describes McCurry as being interested only in Gula and as photographing only Gula. This is contrary to McCurry's version, in which he reports photographing several other girls before working with Gula. According to McCurry, he then made several photos of Gula to establish a rapport. The teacher helped put Gula at ease by telling the young girl the photograph would be used to tell the world about Afghan refugee suffering.
Tony states that the only explanation for the framing of the photo is that McCurry wanted it for a cover shot. He implies McCurry knew it would be a cover. McCurry is on the record saying he didn't know the photo would be a cover until months later when he met with editors in Washington DC to review photos from that assignment.
Tony quotes Gula as saying she "was scared to death." In McCurry's telling, Gula was nervous but not frightened; not terrified. After making the photos, Gula ran off to play with her classmates. Decades later, Gula went on the record talking about being proud of the photo, the positive impact it has had on her and the larger Pashtun community.
Tony emphasizes that McCurry didn't get her name, background info or father's permission to make or publish the photo. He neglects to state that McCurry has said he got permission from the teacher.
Tony also did not mention the multiple attempts McCurry made during the 1990s to locate the subject of that famous photo. Tony continues to tell a story in which National Geographic tracks Gula down in 2002 and manipulates her to permit McCurry to photograph her, again. The way Tony tells the story, saying it's essentially a instance of violation. This is contrary to the record. Gula is on the record staying she is proud of the photograph, the impact it has had on her and other Pashtuns.
Further more, having contacted a Steve McCurray family member (i wont say which), theyre upset at the 1st and 2nd video both.
I really hope they seek legal recourse, because that seems to be the only way to make it known that the initial approach to the subject and the subsequent handling of the blowback had been unacceptable
@@twraia Tony boy even uploaded his original hit piece video tonight.... ROFL
@@KenTheoriaApophasis I suspect he's just going to get away with it. There seems to be a huge disconnect between the so-called "RUclips photography community" (not sure in what sense there's such a community) and the photography world out there. I'm not sure if a well-established member of Magnum Photos would care about what a disrespectful RUclips personality (no offence to RUclipsrs) has to say about his work. I do hope that his legal team would pursue the matter further and put an end to this race-to-the-bottom click-bait controversy-stoking approach. Tony's hit piece was disgraceful for all the reasons you explained in your video response. I hope he gets the opportunity to learn from his mistake instead of being shielded by his large RUclips fanbase.
@@KenTheoriaApophasis Not a fan of yours Ken and knowing you don't like Tony I'm not surprised to see you getting involved in this. However I can equally dislike you and dislike what Tony did. I agree the original video was nothing but a hatchet job on McCurry, something Tony denies.
I hope McCurry does speak to a lawyer.
Please mind your business. Thank you.
This was really confusing without some context. For anyone else who was confused, the “event” they are referring to is the controversy over a video about the Afghan Girl uploaded on Tony & Chelsea Northrup’s channel.
Thankyou. I had seen the video and still wasn't sure
Oh, their channel. They are so boring and unwatchable, I don't know why they have so many views.
Well they have one less now. @@riversong_
It was called "The sad untold truth behind the afghan girl"
Peter McKinnon as well. He did a video as well accusing
Northrup's article is not investigative reporting and you two are not peer reviewers. Peer reviewing is an academic process. Northrup has an opinion based on secondary research. In my further researches, I just looked at a DPReview thread from 2013 and almost all of the issues Northrup raises are already there, so he did not invent his opinion out of thin air!
Well said. Ted is engaging in narcissistic concern trolling.
So what is worse; the original exploitation, the exploitation of that exploitation, the exploitation of the exploitation of the exploitation, your confirmation bias or my confirmation bias?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
@@albatros12😂
The mouth breathers don't get it Jim, but you nailed it.
Jim Cox "Exploitation of the exploitation" OK, understood...sort of. But who would you approve of calling out someone on alleged bad behavior, a group of nuns? Virtually any person or organization that tries to take action on an exploitation is going to benefit from it somehow themselves.
@@anthonyc1883 you are right, an one hour long video discussing about ethics but still not evidencing Tony's mistakes... This video should have been more interesting if it was kept around 10-15 minutes long. I like Ted but this was a waste of time for me...
Would be interesting to see this conversation continued, now that Tony has issued a correction and full source list.
A forthcoming podcast with Ted and Tony perhaps?
"Afgan Girl" has a name you know. It's Sharbat Gula. If you want to get all high and mighty about photo ethics, you might start by acknowledging the name and thus the humanity of the subject of the photograph you are discussing.
Just sayin'.....
Couldn’t agree more
"Afghan Girl" is the name of the picture. It's how that photo is called. Like "Girl With a Pearl Earring"...
Just do a quick search on "Afghan Girl", and you'll find: "Afghan Girl is a 1984 photographic portrait of Sharbat Gula".
Whenever they said "Afghan Girl" in this video, they were referring to the work, not the person. It does not mean they don't acknowledge the "humanity of the subject".
@@HenriqueSantosCosta The "American Guys" in the discussion above never call Sharbat Gula by name. They also claim "no one know's what happened" which is bullshit: Sharbat knows, and so did any adults present. She has told her side of the story, and it makes McCurry look like a typical prick photographer violating the boundaries of a subject to get the "decisive moment" without regard for the subject. A human being has a right not to be photographed - at least in private where this occurred. She was a child. Her parents were not consulted. Showing her face to a male who wasn't a member of her family was taboo, much less to a stranger.
The Western equivalent would be to have an ISIS terrorist take a nude photograph of a 12 year old "American Girl" - without her or her family's permission - and publish it on the Daesh website as propaganda against the West.
You might not see it that way, but I assure you, the traditional / fundamentalist Afghans and Pakistani tribespeople in the region see it that way. The discussion in the video above is a perfect example of cultural ignorance and a colonial mindset that treats human beings from places like Afghanistan as less human than westerners. Thus it is ok to exploit them for everything from photographs to their land, labor, and natural resources.
It's bullshit, and it needs to stop if we want to call ourselves civilized.
@@Hoganoutdoors Oh shut up.
Thanks Ted. This is desperately needed. Your work is outstanding and I love the artist series.
Edward Iglesias agreed - the best photography video of 2019. Great job Ted!
Saw that video. Not impressed. Anyway, Ted, you are NOT quitting RUclips and if you need funding to create more artists series, say so. Create a Patreon or whatever. I have no idea how it works but I’ll find out if it keeps your channel going. I got dragged in when you were talking about the old masters using Pinterest and haven’t stopped watching since. Oh, and there is one episode of the artist series I hope you’ll get to make some day. Don Mccullin. I’d pay for that alone. Anyways, keep going.
+1 on paying for the Artist series. For my money, a photography enthusiast's view, Ted's videos on Art and Artists hold more value than photography training options out there (MegaDeal, MasterClass, etc.).
Ted does have a "whatever" way to have viewers to contribute there is a "JOIN" button not that far from the subscription bell. It is a $4.99/month membership and you get some perks for it. Nothing stops people from contributing.
I doubt that RUclips will be publishing the horror of war captured in Don McCullin's pictures any day soon.
"I'm not making assumptions about anybody, but that is the case". Do you know what an assumption is, Jaron? It's what you said right before this statement!
Interesting video, however I missed the part where you showed evidence that the original video was inaccurate. This feels like massive double standards, criticising another RUclipsr for not having evidence then showing no evidence yourself. Just your own opinion that he’s wrong. How are you any different and how do you know he’s not been forced to take it down for threat of legal action, regardless of evidence, as you talk about?
I think it was Tony's responsibility to prove his accusations and he failed miserably in that.
Check their follow-up video and update your comments.
Valid point. This 50 plus minute video dances around an issue without dealing with it head on. Sure, It’s reasonable to ask for additional information, sources. This does not, however in any way discredit the argument itself. This whole video is straw manning. . . . Even the fact this video is done in conversational format with an “investigative journalist”, seems to be deployed as means to suggest it is somehow reasonable to accept truth from authority rather than authority from truth. Forbes says he respects McCurry. Well, thanks for volunteering this opinion. It would be more optimal to argue why we the viewers should have unqualified respect for McCurry. Also it would be nice to see him outlining a general framework of a few of the conventions on photojournalism ethics- rather than seeming to give a photojournalist a lot of leeway in portraying truth. If this is the case- photojournalism has failed to give the general public objective truth and settled for the subjective instead.
Hmm only the photography community is up in arms about this
Great video. Thanks Guys. I love the idea of peer review on important videos, but 2 things spring to mind. 1. who has the time to dedicated reviewing each others work 'in our field'? And 2. given the race to get content out, it sometimes leads to a competitive spirit, so is it realistic to even hope for?
Again thanks for the video. Food for thought definitely.
Maybe just for critical or ground breaking “theoretical” work. We use the peer review process every week in software development. I think your point on qualification is key. A peer review for a journalistic piece would likely be a different person / skillset than the mathy inverse square law / iso stuff.
Dale Shelton thanks for the feedback. I have sent a few videos to a colleague to check, but I wouldn’t think it appropriate to bounce it off multiple people, especially those who are ‘competing for views’
Matt Granger Concur. I can’t imagine more than 10% of content warranting external peer review, and yea, would you use a “competitor” for that? I’d think most would only need an internal editorial review by a producer or similar second hand. I would love a deeper dive into this first to market mindset. All the tubers talk about it as important. Can / has that importance been quantified? I see a lot of shallow reviews to get something out about this or that. But does it have a material impact on views?
I think some things need refuted. The worst offenses. T/C make many foolish comments. But what they did with Steve was worthy of every bit of criticism possible and I hope Steve humbles them with a huge lawsuit. I would donate to that lawsuit!
Hi Matt. Yes, most times no one has time for peer review. And most videos don't really need a peer review because RUclipsr like you usually make videos where you state opinions. Opinions can differ and that's okay. The problem comes up when you call your opinion an undisputed fact and look down on someone else, whose work has been eons ahead of you.
Tony's video was ill researched and had he realized it's importance, he would have asked a fellow photographer for an opinion on his video.
Wow, what a discussion! As a former English teacher, current high school digital media teacher, and person with a RUclips channel, I can’t thank you enough for highlighting the importance and efforts of true journalism. I’m disappointed that a well known and usually trusted source would handle a situation this way.
But again, I’m SO grateful to you guys for having this discussion. 👍
Even in the comments here on your video people are pointing, blaming, and accusing other of their actions. It seems almost impossible to have people remain civil and actually do their research for any topic. I really enjoyed this video format of your podcast and I hope you two do more. I especially liked this topic.
Sadly you are correct.
Marves Rivas ...Spot on Marves....
I've watched many of your videos, but never saw this one. Outstanding! So spot-on and appreciated! I'm not one to comment, but sometimes we need to speak up when people contribute positively to counteract all the static out there. And I'm one of those that thoroughly enjoyed The Artist Series! Sad that it was not financially viable. Anyway...thanks for the inspiration!
It's the algorithms that leads to analytics that leads to content creation. TV and press media never had instant access to analytics.
This is one reason why I love your channel. You don't throw something into the world easily. You take your time to do it right and with reason.
Thanks for this Ted.
I create content on disability for amputees (as I am one), and not getting the views that some people do, who make content similar to mine, often makes me doubt what I put out there.
Your video has made me re-assess what I do, and I've realised that my content is accurate, supportive, helpful, and most importantly, non-sensationalist.
I will never get the subs and views that the sensation seekers attract, but I feel good about my content.
It's real, and as I understand from you guys, ethical.
The message I get from you is that this is what really matters.
Name the last time NYT or WAPO front paged a retraction. All they do is leave a tiny little foot note on the original story, that no one is ever going to read because everyone already read the article.
I find it deeply problematic that you two are trying to preach good journalistic practice and so on, while claiming to have searched through all relevant source material without having found anything that backs up Tony's "accusations". Thereby accusing Tony for fabricating this and just taking on Steve McCurry, just for the sake of taking on Steve McCurry and miscredit him.
1. I've checked those sources too, and both the National Geographics article and their documentary (in four parts here on RUclips) support what Tony has said in the video. There is only one detail I can't find anywhere, and that's that she wore a burka before the original photo was taken. The rest is absolutely backed up by the same sources that you yourselves are referring to. You guys are simply reading it the way you want to read it. And now you're both accusing Tony for lying and all sorts of other things while ridiculing him and his methods in general. You're doing e-x-a-c-t-l-y what you accuse him for yourselves.
I'll be happy to list all quotes from both article and documentary if you'll confirm that you're actually reading this. I've already done this elsewhere, so it'll both be quick and easy for me to to do, and on the other hand pointless if you don't care.
thank you!
Now I don't have to. Tony did this in a new video himself, and reposted the original video with sources properly mentioned.
So much for this video and it's pretentious content. Y'all should be better than this.
Now that Tony has actually made his redaction, and reposted, you really should apologize. Anything less makes this video kinda pathetic. It already now is a little ridiculous.
Torben Lysholm the one thing people seem to miss about Tony is that time again he has proven that 1. He can accept criticisms and correct his errors 2. He understands the gravitas of publishing online content and the legalities 3. He does his due diligence. But lastly 4. He rarely injects any personal feelings and emotions into their work.
The Northrups, to use a bodybuilding term are not “bro scientists”.
Its such a shame that the reasons for the amouny of hate they get is more so centered around their palatability and success(not from Ted). And as the old saying goes success breeds a little envy.
@@muntublackson4757 Well said!
Torben Lysholm cheers
Agree 100 percent. I worked as a photojournalist for 12 years. Former staffer at the Chicago Tribune. Now I work contribute to The New York Times and The WSJ and this stuff drives me bananas. Thanks for the video. This has been needed.
Good discussion. You're so right about the beast!! Love your channel. I'm a little confused by Jaron's statement kind of criticizing those who didn't go to journalism school to "learn how to have journalistic ethics" followed by Jaron saying, "actually consider myself a journalist" yet having a diploma for BA degree in Business hanging there. Perhaps the frame above it is degree in Journalism? Does the 10,000 hour rule apply here?
For all the fuss you make about checking sources, you should know Tony posted on twitter on the 6th why he took it down and what's going on, but this was posted on the 7th. I didn't hear any mention of that. I'd expect to see a post pinned to the top providing that additional information, to be ethical.
Not to nitpick, but I think the work you're groping for is retraction not redaction. Redaction is the blacking out of content to be protected in a document. I agree with Ryan's comment below, the the Time buries their retractions.
I mean he did create a ton of investigative pieces. Six I think? That's a ton right?
BlownMacTruck I thought he said 3 and spend a month on each. Let’s assume he worked 40 solid hours a week for 6 months as an investigative journalist. Thats about 1000 hours. Only 9000 to go and he’ll be an expert. He did have valid points, but his position of authority on the subject is a bit lower that it appears he thinks it is.
Dale Shelton Yep, I completely agree. Valid points but came off as very preachy to the point of condescending without a huge amount of experience.
Hi Ted!
I don't know if you'll read this comment, but I want you to know that the Artist Series is one of your bodies of work that got me hooked on your channel. I gained so much respect for you after watching those videos and was inspired to my core.
Learning about the history, philosophies, and techniques of these photographers encouraged me to continue developing my own style. Whether it was Grobet talking about her love for Blue Demon, or Wilson describing her experience as Avedon's assistant, I felt like I could relate to those people. Not only was I amazed by their work and the stories they told, but I felt like I was capable of telling my own stories; Just like them.
I want to be an artist. I want my photographs to convey emotion; to document culture. I believed I could after watching the Artist Series.
It may have been a flop, and I completely understand why that's infuriating after watching this video, but now you know there's one more person out there who was exceptionally inspired and educated by your hard work.
I think the explanation of peer review is wrong, academic studies are not published until they have been peer reviewed, not after.
Thanks for the interesting take on the matter and in depth video ! Just would like to add two things to the discussions: (i) Did one of you went to the McCurry photo expo which was showed one or two years ago? Because, if I remember correctly, McCurry himself in the audio commentary said he talked quite a lot and had to insist for the girl to remove its tchadri and that she seemed reluctant. Not giving any opinion on the matter and the intention of McCurry, this is all speculative.
Second thing, which has to do with peer-reviewed. I worked in academia for several years and got to published scientific papers. And in fact, the peer-reviewed process mostly starts before the publication, when revising and commenting the manuscript of the paper. It is only when the necessary modifications have been made to the study that the editor actually decides if the manuscript is suitable for publication or not. Of course, there will be debate after the publication, and the quality of accepted papers varies greatly. However, the problem of a controversial paper being largely spread by medias without any counter-arguments is indeed an issue, which has little less to do with peer-reviewed process.
51 minutes of the same stuff gets a bit boring. They could have given their opinion in less than ten minutes.
@@KrispyCrem3, you tell me because Ted has over 43,000 views and 750 comments... not bad. In my opinion, Ted is looking for clicks as well.
Im only here because of the controversy. Ted usually speaks well and has a great speaking voice, but damn, some his videos just go nowhere.
@@munkykng416, I totally agree.
@@KrispyCrem3, I have better things to do with my time. They are all looking for hits because that's how most of them make money.
All about the views , I skipped the video and went to the comments . Everyone is up in arms
Dude, trust me. We get it. RUclips keeps putting some garbage in our click path based on past successes in a channel but as a full time working pro photographer I can speak for myself And say ... your channel is quality! It’s recognized!
Just an fyi: when you say peer-review you actually mean replication study. Otherwise great and important topic. I think for all of us one thing is true: time is a limited resource. So we all have that problem of just looking at one source and trusting that. And yes we all need to - at least once in a while - make sure that those sources are still trustworthy.
Replication studies are part of the larger peer review process. "Peer review" is used as a suitcase term for a whole host of ways to cross check scientific findings.
Landscope 360 fair enough
@@youknowwho9247 "peer review" means that your article is literally reviewed by peers, i.e. other scientists in the field who supposedly have enough knowledge to determine whether your study makes sense or not (indeed to avoid things like studies with few participants, wrong statistical analyses, etc.)... replication study is when someone tries to replicate someone else's published experiments to check that they get the same results.. so they're both trying to achieve the same goal, i.e. scientific truth, but are two separate things..
@@TheJudge064 "Peer review" is a suitcase term describing any method or action by which scientist aim to validate other scientists' findings. A replication study is one such action, it attempts to reproduce the results of the original study by essentially repeating it, to make sure findings are consistent.
Thanks guys for an open and honest talk/discussion which hit a lot of home runs for me. You highlighted a lot of the issues, I have with some of the channels and I can add a few more!
I’m sure we have all seen the videos based off of a spec sheet or a press release , they then rubbish it for not having some cool feature that is this months ‘flavour of the month’ but then at the end they give a short link to pre-order one... what!!
I tire of reviews that concentrate on the downside of a cameras video performance, whilst omitting to say anything about its stills performance. Some of us never use the video features, we don’t care... but try finding a balanced review of the stills performance is becoming harder and harder.
Keep up the hard work Ted, thank you for all that you do.
Enjoyed this video, thank you. The monster you were reffering to, can ruin someone's reputation, make a false idol, as well as cause some real economic damage by, for example, cutting sales for some companies (cameras are good example - some minor issue, which can often be fixed after simply getting more familiar with a product, can be the main focus of several reviews, replicated dozens or even handreds of times all over youtube in a matter of days). İn my opinion people over internet are driven by simple emotions rather than reason nowadays much more than it was even 5 years ago. Act first, think later, or even worse - just act and forget. All that matters is today's agenda. It affects photography as an art as well - If your photo is not 'pop', i.e. does not leave a burning trace on eye retina, it would probably be unnoticed. No matter the content/conceptionx composition/skill because those often require time and some reflexion to be fully understood and appreciated. So this goes both ways: content creators - are rarely motivated to spend time to do a qualified job, because all is required to get views is a pop image/ loud informational occasion. And consumers/audience don't want to take enough time to find quality content/ make a factcheck/reflex when there is so much vivid/loud content/trends out there, or simply can't because it is easy to get lost in all this abundance and variety of bs...
Catching up on your older presentations, Ted, realizing what a valuable asset your channel is. I'm not a gear-head as I only watch segments that deal with my two brands, but I really enjoy and learn from your other videos. Your "Artist" series is inspiring and worth waiting for. Live long and prosper...
I miss your other type of videos TED, the ones when you used to go to print labs or when you hang out with your friends to shoot with medium format. I would love to see you doing stuff other than gear reviews.
He's got to keep the lights on, as he said. Gear and drama is what sells.
@@jamesmarko1787 true and I understand, but the TED I knew and enjoyed watching still can give a one post from the old gold days
What does it say about a person, a channel, a platform if a longtime viewer likes a format of video that made a channel popular, but he or she now has to accept that he or she won’t get that format because lights must stay on? I, for one, don’t care about the lights being on if they’re only on to illuminate an object I’m told to buy. Should we really be so eager to watch a platform of infomercials disguised as “content”?
Love this conversation. In my days as a very active Wikipedian I learned to double check som much sources and discovered so many facts that were unclear. Being a Wikipedian is a great school for the internet.
1) The snippets of the interview with the television show has a full version that Tony simply used one small part of where Sharbat Gula speaks about her difficult times. He conveniently left out out the parts where she was laughing and joking around with the hosts. 2) She was detained not because of the picture, but because it was found that her documents were fake (in such a situation, you will be deported no matter how famous you are, no matter which country is in question). This happened many years after the picture was taken. Tony conveniently left that out. 3) Sharbat Gula was gifted a 3,000 sqf home to live in and receives USD 700 every month. According to Tony, she was left alone with nothing. 4) There is a BBC interview where Sharbat Gula says that when she was young she was uncomfortable but later when she saw the impact her image was able to create, she was happy. Tony suggested that she was abused and used. But, the interview suggests from the subject of the controversy claims otherwise. 5) Tony and Chelsea claimed that Nat Geo and McCurry did not respond to them. Another lesser popular RUclipsr claimed he received a reply from McCurry in 5 hours. There seems to be more facts destroying Tony's claims and even suggests some fabrications to what really happened at the shoot, and the living conditions of Sharbat Gula by Tony. McCurry is a photojournalist who has risked his life to cover wars and create important works of history. Tony on the otherhand is a RUclipsr with very little professional work in his credentials. I prefer to give McCurry the benefit of the doubt over Tony. Tony is not a working photographer, he is an educator at best. And I take offence when an educator pieces together selective bits and presents them as facts. I concur with the guys in this video, there is no source out there that supports Tony claims. I don't know what some of you were smoking when you decided to defend Tony but I found so much that debunks nearly everything tony said by just doing a simple google search on Sharbat Gula.
Seriously though, why is everybody getting so upset about what Tony did? People tend to not like it when strangers shove a camera up in your face, and I can really imagine how it must've felt for this little girl when the photo was taken. Stop getting so defensive about this old man just because he's someone you idolize. Photographers tend to do basically anything to get the shot, and it happens that people step over boundaries. Tony brings up something that should be in the back of peoples mind a lot more, he's not just ruthlessly attacking McCurry. Both sides of the argument have good points. Challenge yourself, and don't just assume that the shot is yours to take at all points
the point is Tony got some basic things wrong and made a lot of assumptions, but I get the feeling you are not interested in facts or truth
Love the discussion. And Woodward and Bernstein are household names. Just saying.
Ask someone who is younger than 40 yo they will not know who Woodward/Bernstein/Deep throat are. Ask a millennial , they don't know what Watergate is.
Woodward and Bernstein were diligent about making sure they got their facts right. That means they made sure that truth was more important than expediency and convenience.
Seems like a follow-up video is now on RUclips, what is the reaction to that?
They do not front page their redactions. Maybe they have done it before but they don't do it very often.
Ryan Daugherty they put the redactions on the same page the original story was - which is how it should be done
They put their redactions in fine print below the obituary page.
@ if they ever do.
Stay true to your craft, Ted. Your channel content is the best. Your videos are always educational and inspirational, which is what I am looking for in a photography based RUclips channel. Creating content is hard work, but quality is more important than being first to post, in my opinion.
If it isn't about high ISO performance or whether a camera crops in 4k, I'm not interested ; )
The basic rule in taking in any form of media these days is that you have to be able determine the real from the fake. It is getting harder and harder and the only way it will change is through good education. We the consumers allow it happen and we shouldn't. Thank you Ted and Jaron for your views and be encouraged Ted that, as a retiree clicking on a lot of RUclips channels about photography these days, I keep coming back to The Art of Photography.
Your Artist Series, especially the one on David Brookover, has been a particular inspiration to me and I look forward to your new videos.
One card slot is the end of the world. Digital ISO is fairy dust. Afghan girl serially abused by heartless American photojournalist. This mania is becoming worse by the day. Send him to RUclips rehab so he can get back to explaining how back button focus works.
John Dickinson 😆
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Love all the butthurt haters circle jerking over this without checking the actual sources to this story. Talk about abusing a serious issue to get back at someone you disagree with.
@@youknowwho9247 this is a very serious issue, for Northrup, who's about to eat a lawsuit.
Once upon a time, someone, somewhere, for some reason, screwed up. Yeah, I get it. I am so tired of people blowing up over issues decades, centuries, and millenia past, which can not be changed. Next!
In this age of “alternative facts”, opinion has become more important. Whichever interpretation of a story you wish to believe becomes a rallying point. Fact checking (from either viewpoint) falls by the wayside.
You’re the best Ted! I know there are many photography RUclips channels I really only have time for yours anymore.
Why didn't Ted call Tony out? I am actually disappointed by Ted's reaction. They mention Stephen all the time but not one mention of Tony. Hmmm...?!?!
You have to wonder about the people who give this video a thumbs down. Who are they and why do they hate important content? Do they speak English? Do they have any kind of education above middle school? I found this to be a very important reminder. Thank you.
Did you reach out to Northrup in the way you said he should reached outs to McCurry?
Guess he didn’t. It’s been days since you asked and he has yet to respond. Perhaps he should just stick purely to “the art of photography” and not the photographic representation of facts- mainly photojournalism.
Ted, I have to say that the single most beneficial and enjoyable series I have seen on RUclips or documentaries in general has been your Artists Series. I watch them over and over again. It's had a huge impact on my work as a photographer and artist. Thank you again sir!
Gonna be a lot of awkward moments at the next Sony/Canon press conference. lol
Pls don't stop posting RUclips videos Ted. Your content and channel is breath of fresh air. Your videos are one of a few first videos I watched to help me gather the courage to dive into photography and the goal to go full time in a few years. You inspired. Keep up the good work!!
Tony posted on twitter and Chelsea posted on instagram that they have taken the video down temporarily because McCurry got back to them and is addressing the claims. They said they will put the video back up with any changes necessary. at 24:00 on you guys claim that they're covering it up. But they were open and honest about why it is currently down.
Devan Rawn thanks for information instead of bashing!
And they waited two days after taking it down before saying anything. All of the outcry could have been avoided if they had simply said why they took it down when they did. All the TC trolls tend to skirt pass that issue.
Carlos Vega well not sure if it is that simple in a society where lawyers and people try to make a lot of money in lawsuits and every opportunity is welcome.
Ken (the tatooed guy) made a refutation of this bs, which was close to what İ know or heard. The best thing T&C can do is admit, they were wrong, but they decided to try to look good. And cover the hole story. From my point of view their whole channel is the finest example of 'rush to post no matter what' behaviour which was discussed here by Ted. Unsubscribed from them two months ago.
@Carlos Vega I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with it. I'm saying there's not some big deceitful cover-up, it's an ongoing story, and Tony let viewers know. Jaron was talking about it as if this event was ancient history and Tony is never going to address it. Clearly he will.
Not to put too fine a point on this but; Snap Chic has 144,000 subscribers, Fro knows Photo has 980,000, while Tony (& Chelsea) have over a million. Even that bloviating cue ball who shall go nameless has over 170,000. So, my point is this... maybe we are NOT all better than this. Also, you are entitled to your opinion but you are not the RUclips arbiter of journalistic integrity.
"bloviating cue ball" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Actually, he's an albino 8-ball.
@@jojoaausone But he is loud and he courts controversy like he's addicted to it. Never really seems to have anything to say though. At least Ted has a measured and well thought out opinion, but on this I think he's a bit off base.
@@tomscott4438 I'm with you on this, Tom. TAP is like a broken record, endlessly replaying a discordant tune.
I watched this video from "he who shall not be named" and with his reputation coming under fire more and more lately I checked the sources. But I was amazed at how many people praised his "investigative" work and how he opened their eyes 🤦♀️
It's called "trust". I watched the video (I sub to them) when it was there. I thought that the video presented itself as having the appropriate information to go this way. I do not know his sources. But I don't think he had a reason to be disingenuous. I'll let this play ......
@@Reyfox1 One of the big problems with the original video is that his sources were from recollections in television appearances by the afghan women. If you hunt around and watch the original documentary where they searched for the Afghan girl, when she was found she said she didn't really recall it at the time. Remember that it was a day in her life when she was 10 or 12 years old. They found her 17 years later and she couldn't say at the time if it was her, and only after having experts examine the photo and her eyes did they conclude that it was actually her.
@@brin57 it's just sad that he would even put this type of video online. He spent a lot of time doing this. Now, we will see what happens. His image has been tarnished and I am sure he will be taking a lot of heat for this.
You guys have just summarized almost all of our current media. Headlines on pg. 1, redaction in the small print on the last page.
Hmmm, Tonys comment he left on here seems to have disappeared. Just curious , was it you or him who deleted it Ted?
Ted pinned it to the top for context and transparency even though the tone of Tony's comment was somewhat accusatory towards himself and Jaron, so I doubt that Ted would be the one behind its disappearance. Perhaps Tony realised he was doing more harm to himself with what seems like a spur of the moment comment and decided to delete it.
@@twraia Probably what's happened. Anyway , keep up the good work Ted - just don't sit near T&C on the next RUclipsr outing with Sony !!! ( if they dare show up that is :-) ). Now back to normal service hopefully.
People were getting rather 'excited' replying to Tony's comment, so it should have been pinned without possibility of comment given he's not here to reply.
@@ScowlerJase I thought Ted gave T & C more than enough professional curtesy: they didn't even explicitly mention them throughout this podcast (as far as I remember) and emphasised again and again that the issue was much greater than what triggered the discussion. Jaron and Ted were actually even sympathetic! But T was more interested in wagging his finger at them at that point. I doubt this incident would cause any meaningful damage to T & C's business interest and prompt them to rethink their approach. It's harder to reflect on one's mistake when one's surrounded by a legion of loyal fans
@@peregrineslim4446 I am of the opinion that if Tony was willing to post such an accusatory comment here, he should be able to stand behind it even when he's criticised by "excited" people. You spoke as if he didn't have the chance to reply, but of course he did (does). If he's not even willing to stand by his comment, why bother posting it in the first place?
The Subject is Sharbat Gula photographed in 1985 she was 10 years old. In a BBC youtube video --ruclips.net/video/cfY2zfv7_V0/видео.html - she tells part of her story, bringing up some of the issues we are now hearing. She also has a message of reconciliation. That said, as a parent I think, under any situation and especially under cultural norms of Afghanistan, it seems inappropriate for a stranger to be photographing a 10 year old child. It is done all the time, for profit or not. There is an aspect of exploitation in photography of indigenous, impoverished, forlorn, migrant or refugee people. Especially children. It is done under the name of 'journalism' 'getting the story', 'showing the world the truth'. I have no answer to this, just questions.
I'm a bit disappointed by this video. There are clear statements from the woman about how she felt anger during the photo from the follow up nat geo article. Understanding cultural context and cultural norms can lead to an appropriate connection that the photography session was, at the least, unsettling and, at the worst, deeply offensive. You don't need to damn all of McCurry's work to say he may have acted improperly here. Her getting a nice house at the end of the day doesn't solve any of the ethical issues as it is unlikely that this would be the result most of the time. If you wanted a take down of his work then provide your sources in a detailed format and go through each of the points that you think are wrong. Overall, my main issue that it seems to be a bunch of north american men who are unable to think outside of themselves and different cultural standards and focus too much on the man and not enough on the ethics around photographing marginalized persons.
People care a lot about McCurry but it seems that nobody cares about the gil's feelings and culture. That's a shame.
Tony’s original video was mainly based on incorrect info and context. See he “apology” follow up video.
@@CodyCha I did, and while there was some incomplete information, his general point actually wasn't invalidated. Again, this conversation has devolved into a "you don't have the 100% truth on all matters so Tony is dumb" instead of what type of ethics is required in taking photos of vulnerable and marginalized persons
Ted, i've been subscribed to your channel for years now. This video reminded me of the reason.
You're willing and very able to take on the topics, that you know very well are not going to go viral, but still are IMPORTANT. Important from an ethical standpoint, from an artistic standpoint.
I love and respect you for that, as i realise this kind of content creation involves some very hard to make decisions and integrity. Both things, unfortunately many very successful channels aren't willing to provide.
Very very important video here, thank both of you!
Tony put the original video back up with a plethora of sources and some clarification...
I am watching this after heavily investigating the current accusations against Michael Jackson - and it's astonigishing to see the parallels. Sad, sad world.
I don't usually like the Northrups and their clickbaity titles but I'm really disappointed that you made this video Ted. Tony has said that they gave Nat Geo a chance to respond 3 days prior to uploading the video and that there is no legal action involved; only that they want to reupload the video with some comments from Steve himself. This video response is simply making a mountain out of a molehill, and honestly if the allegations that the Northrups have brought against McCurry are true, I don't see why you should call their video a race to the bottom. The original video even made an effort to remain unbiased and talked about the positive aspects of the picture towards the end, but this video just seems unnecessarily negative towards their video without any context.
And why would you compare the ethics of photojournalism to scientific studies? They are in no way similar. One is subjective and the other is objective.
Well they removed the video from their channel. Clearly he has been advised they could be taken to court for his statements and that would only be the case if he majorly got it wrong. So check your facts and stop defending the indefensible. I am disappointed with Ted because he didn't call Tony out.
Thanks for taking the time for this guys! Ted, your videos have always been fresh and very well thought and communicated. Jaron, great to hear you join Ted, well spoken as well. This video is not a 5min soundbite, but we all need less of those. It's not possible to talk about real things in 5mins. In today's post-truth era, having sensible and educated conversations about topics are more important than ever. Always appreciate you guys time, thanks again!
90's Gangster rap fights! XD XD XD
This is a rant against the incentives behind the RUclips business model (and attention seeking websites in general) using Tony's video as bait. You never take on the actual video or provide counter factual evidence to what Tony said. So, you are doing exactly the same thing you are criticizing but worse: you are using someone else's content to attract more views to your channel but without taking on the original subject of the matter which is Steve McCurry's Afghan Girl photo. Easy way out, but feels coward. That being said, your rant against the superficial incentives of the click economy is valid and I agree with most of it.
Thanks TED. Balanced perspective responsibly presented. I was disturbed by the inferences made on the recent RUclips piece and did not take the appropriate steps to research the story properly. Your tactful approach in response has been very educational and is much appreciated. Thanks also to your colleague. I will be more careful in the future before judging the integrity and truthfulness of stories surrounding the works of important artist and photojournalists.
Any reason you refuse to name the individual, TONY NORTHRUP, that behaved in the manner you spend an hour criticizing?
Because we live in a "snowflake" society. Everyone has to be PC. Just freaking name names already sheesh!
Because it is about more than that and naming him would just undermine this. Also not naming him makes the watcher do more research...
@@00_Ryan_00 I don't see as PC snowflake culture. I see it giving a person who made a mistake their dignity especially for the future and someone stumbles on this video
i'm sorry, who in THE hell clicked on this and didn't know precisely what video and who created it? THAT is also an implicit part of the point. (OK there are maybe 0.1% who were confused; the rest of us are utterly fascinated, even if incensed....)
We all know who he is talking about. People who do not follow photography as we do would not be interested in this topic or even know the reference. It would be classes to mention the content creator (Tony)
I agree in most of the conversation you guys had.. In order to do an specific topic you must be prepared for it.. In order to present a clear opinion or investigation, you have to probe your thesis is valid and plan your general and specific objectives.. You cannot jump in conclusions without knowing reasons.. One of the many reasons is lack of education. Sometimes people think they know a specific topic without a valid argument. I remember in high school I learn investigation as part of my curriculum before graduate. The reason was I have to do a Thesis that have to be validated and took a full year to do it.. Of course you learn by mistakes and that help in your future of your career no matter which one you choose. In fact after going to university and graduate as Graphic and Industrial Designer ( photography was part of the graphic since involve commercial, fashion, advertising etc) I had to do a final project in order to graduated it. The main point. You always have to be prepared. Doing research help a lot in everything around. Not only photography, arts, science, journalism, etc.. New generation don't care about researching because everything that is online, only a small percentage is right the rest is wrong.. So be professional and don't fall in this issues.. As you guys said or in other words is I rather recognize my own mistakes and be thankful that people support me no matter the case and grow up more and be better than let it go and lose what I have build (reputation) with a bad desicion or judgement from my side to others for not be prepared enough to dispute an argument and damage someone integrity or get sue for my stupidity... Good video :)
Well done video guys. I somewhat get why people go through all these lengths to create clicks. I don't agree with it. Heck I try to get attention the honest way with the podcasts I do and can see why people fall in to the trap of doing what Tony Northrup et al do on their feeds. It's hard getting noticed staying clean. You have Ted, you have kept at this for all these years. Others what instant success and do whatever to get there.
Thanks again for your thoughtful insights in to the industry and art world. Hopefully this scenario can be used to help us all learn something.
Btw I did go to university and when doing my doctoral studies I had to make sure my sources were sound, but sadly this is not the way of the world for most others.
Ciao,
CWDaly
From my point of view RUclips is getting much more narrow in terms of content about photography, it seems to be mostly gear reviews (based on people who have rented a camera for a few days, often) and really basic advice / hacks / tricks, etc. It’s getting harder to find quality and enjoyable content - Sean Tucker is certainly one person who comes to mind here producing good work. For myself, I have noticed in the least few months I have been using RUclips less, as I don’t really need to see endless videos aimed at just getting hits. I have been searching out other ideas, like Podcasts and blogs, where I hope the pressure to produce quick content is less and the quality is better. Just my two pennies worth. By the way, I really like your artists’ series (and wished I could have saw the one that was pullled).
This conversation included a series of issues:
• The propriety of the circumstances involved in capturing the “Afghan Girl” photo.
• The journalistic integrity of TN’s recent RUclips video.
• The impact of RUclips/Google’s business model on journalistic standards.
• The responsibility of content consumers to vet the content.
Each of these is important issues. But, the curriculum they represent is too vast to address in a single video/pod cast. It needs to be broken down into what one professor I had called, “digestible chunks.”
Regarding the recent video posted by TN, I have the following thoughts:
We were not there. But, TN made a compelling observation the photo was posed. So, I’d like to know:
• Was the photo posed?
• Was the subject a child when the photo was taken?
If it was posed as opposed to just being snapped while visiting a refugee relocation center, then I offer these follow up questions:
• Did the photographer obtain a model’s release?
• If a child was involved, did a parent or legal guardian authorize the photo shoot?
• If a child was involved, was there another adult in the room or space and where/when the photo shoot occurred? [more for the photographer’s protection]
• How was the model acknowledged in the publication of the photo?
• If the photographer is from a western democracy that is protective of children with a system of law, regulation and administrative rules, does said photographer have an obligation to apply his/her ethical conduct on photographing people, including children, while visiting other nations/cultures or is it permissible for the visiting photographer to apply another standard of conduct?
[During my career, I was a school administrator. Under Oregon law, we are very very careful about people photographing children on (or even near) school property. Owing to the concept of “in loco parentis” we have an assertive responsibility to protect the rights, dignity and identity of children. My training was to prioritize the child’s rights, protections and dignity first and then start working on the rest of the details.]
and this is the oft missed point in all of this. there was a power play and the loss of agency, and a disregard of the child and her wishes rights and religious practices. a lot of people who dislike the northrups for whatever reason seem to be missing that point. (ted too, which is disappointing). there is also an element of sublime racism, in that we wouldnt accept this if it was a little blond girl and afghan photographer in a european school. the image was outstanding yes, inspiring, indeed. but it should not be expemt from analysing it with today's gaze
.
i had heard and read the story tony presented some years ago and wasnt so shocked. i commend the northrups for taking the highroad with people like the angry photog after all his abusive tendencies and inciting the people who watch him. tony is also a very smart man .. there can be threats of legal action but mccurry wont sue. his ego was just hurt that someone questioned him on such a large forum...
I saw randomly your video which however find them incredibly interesting. Working in the research (academic) field I found pretty interesting the matter relatives to the peer-review. In fact, in my opinion you raised a much deeper (social) problems. The new technology and in general the digital technology has gave us (especially new generations) the perception of the time very distorted. Human brains as well as action with consequent assessment methods to prove or disprove theories and studies, require time. You see how the internet, and in general our lives has changed through the years. More rush, more things to do with the willing to do everything without reject anything cause we can, no matter what but we can. Well, talking about Internet, it opened up possibility of learning fastly, everywhere you are, and sharing fastly things with people that live in opposite parts of the world, something very demanding and slow 30 years ago.This, of course, in good and bad.
After this slight digression we can link this reasoning to the main topic about the peer-review, which requires time to be done, a time that we (as reader or listener) do not give and probably not accept because we are inside this loop on where news are published and then taken as truth despite, as you said, they are completely wrong, but they go viral and they make the scoop. The problems about our anxiety in getting quickly an answer or even success has led to simply superficial Lives. the society moves fast, the news (unfortunately) move too fast, but the methods or researching process to accept or deny someone's theory requires time. a time we do not accept. Also, as you previously mentioned, people is expecting to find the meal already prepared all the time (news that are true and already proved), so it means that they do not have the willing to look for the ORIGINAL sources neither because they think to not be supposed to do so, nor because they don't want to spend their time on that. This is more than a simply problems between media-and-readers, personally I think this is something much deeply eradicated in our "new" society which is quite a eerie statement indeed.
Best.
Alex
The fact that the video has disappeared tells you all you need to know
justmeinit a letter from a lawyer is always an insensitive to do a particular reaction.
Not really.
no that's how people with credibility do rather than trying to bash someone with stupid cooked up stories @@bngr_bngr
@@agneybsuresh That's such nonsense. You're commenting under a video about verifying sources, stating a conclusion drawn without verifying sources.
The reason the original video was taken down is because McCurry reached out to tell his side of the story. Neither him nor NatGeo responded to an initial request for information. So the best way to go about it now is to take the video down until everyone has commented, and then publish the findings. There's no lawsuit.
Why was the video up in the first place without any verifications. When covering such controversial topics isn't it Tonys job to present with truth and facts rather than his assumptions
@@youknowwho9247
Ted- from the bottom of my heart, thank you for this. You two touched on so many important things that bother me about the industry and the world in general. In particular, sharing your response to posting the artist’s series was powerful. I found the honesty refreshing and relatable... it’s nice to know that it’s not just me who feels that way when I share my work. Thank you dude.
Ted, I saw the video you're talking about, and the first thing I thought about, it was irresponsible to do something like that. My first reaction was to unsubscribe from that channel.
I unsubscribed too
Oh! I never click on it! I miss it 😕
I was going to do the same when the ISO video came out, but a let it slide, then they do this, honestly I was very angry with that bullshit about Steve McCurry and I’m glad there’s not too much people believing their bias crap
I unsubscribed from the Northrups a long time ago and glad I did. They put out click bait.
Same here
Dammit Ted. You're the man. I love you what you do. I don't have time to watch this video right now, but I'm coming back to this! Keep on keeping on!
Tony and Chelsea are a perfect example of what I hate about photography.
What do you mean?
@@migueljalo9731 A lot of photographers in my experience, are leaning more towards selling their name rather than their photos. It's all about what gets views regardless of the quality of content.
Who are Tony and Chelsea
@@Quinlanenda They're photography youtubers, They're the ones who were being referenced regrading the slander of the Afghan Girl Photo
Ted, I know that you feel like your photographers series flopped, but I absolutely loved it. it was some of your best work even if its not your highest ranking work :)
unfortunately it's becoming a race to the bottom :-(
They will never understand
I think it's more like a race to the button. (The play button)
RUclips likes that but I'm not sure how the audience will react in this specific case.
What's scarier is the race is downhill and there is a tailwind.
Race to the button. I might borrow that when talking about youtube.
@@Ulrich.Bierwisch
When it comes to publications like Nat Geo, my classmates and I were told explicitly by our professor not to use Nat Geo as a source in our papers specifically because they are not a scientific publication. Right then and there I realized that publications like Nat Geo, because they are so widely circulated and are so interesting because of their stories and photos, have more influence on how people think than actual scientific publications like wildlife journals. Just remember, people, honesty and truth are of much greater importance and value than simply telling an interesting story.
The other obvious fact is that Northrup is not doing investigative journalism. He is gathering known facts and coming to a different conclusion. It's secondary research.
Thank you guys for giving me the chance as i viewer/ listener to take a step back and look at the bigger picture, away from this circle of mass content we call "news" or "reviews" (aka monster). Appreciate it.
Your right I didn't check any sources. I Had some respect for Tony. Why would he do this? He needs to explain why he did this.
get clicks, which lead to higher income.
That's the problem today, people are "brain lazy" and just soak information put in front of them, with no single second thinking about it. You should also watch Angry photographers video on it. Best part is where Tony said that she didn't want her picture to be taken, but today she is proud of it and that photo helped lot of people, which is just tiny little detail Tony didn't say.
You'll get that when hell freezes over.
Ted, your artist series is the most amazing thing. It may take making camera reviews till the end of time in order to stay relevant. But, it's worth it if it enables you to share your work of love. Thank you so much for sharing them with all of us!
So, a double down video was launched and this comment was shadowbanned by Tony:… Let’s answer Tony questions here, why the original video was taken down? To avoid a possible lawsuit, once the threat gone the video was back up online. To check sources? No need to take the video down for that! Number 2, “small” mistake
from the original video, that McCurry forced her… even in her statements there is no indication of that, you can be angry or frighten at the moment, those feeling do not indicate forced or inappropriate behavior from the photographer! 3 the interpretation
of the subtitle of the NG cover… “Afghan refugee fears” the only interpretation is her fears in general, in her life, not her fears of the photographer at the moment when the picture was taken. No one… I repeat NO ONE could ever make the assumption from that
phrase that she was afraid of McCurry or at the people present at that precise moment! Plural fears! Do we still understand the meaning of words? 4 Ok you accept the fact that she had no burka at the moment and that McCurry did not force her to take it down.
Very big mistake!! That was on of the most important ethical question of the video Tony made! Did he forced someone to remove a piece of clothing, and one with an important religious meaning? No! Right there Tony made a huge error! In my opinion just that assumption is enough to discard the entire original video! It changes everything! Because her feeling at the moment could be of fear or anger, but those are not incompatible with consent! But to force someone to remove something they are wearing it is an hole other story. 5 was it a hit piece? In intent Tony says no… In reality? It was absolutely an hit piece… trough and trough! Why? McCurry forced the Afghan girl to take a picture without her consent and forced her to remove a burka she was wearing. What was the point of the video? To prove the unethical behavior of a photographer, and that you should not do it like the bad bad McCurry! Finally are we all photojournalists? Off course NOT! We can be photographers but we are not journalists, not by a long shot!! And Tony speak off himself like he is?!? Hell no! Even if you take a picture that some news organization uses, it does not make you a photojournalist. Let make this clear, do not go around cities or places saying to yourself that you are a journalist. You are
not. 6 my final point is that in photojournalism, the news and public interest supersedes most of ethical and legal ground of a picture being taken. Most photographs are taken against the will and authorization of the subjects. But because the journalist is there to defend the public interest he takes the pictures regardless! What about the Vietnam war girl photo (napalm girl)? If McCurry was bad, imagine to take a photo of a naked girl! What was she feeling at the moment the picture was taken? Did she gave her consent? What about the picture of the dead refugee Syrian boy on the beach? That is why we should not listen to Tony in this matter, he is not qualified to do so! His opinion is irrelevant, he is maybe a photographer but he is not a journalist, and certainly not an expert in ethics! That follow up video, just like the original one are a shame in my opinion! A shame for all the photography community on RUclips.
I know I'm late to the party on this one... but I just wanted to thank you both for putting out a video with some intentionality. I feel like in the "race for views", people often overlook these sorts of discussions, and I feel like it's a real detriment to our understanding and our community at large. Please make more of this thoughtful content, and Ted, as a huge fan of the "Artist Series", thank you for all your hard work.
The recent track record of The NY Times and Washington Post is not so good, but your point remains valid. WAPO was one of several news organizations that ran with a false and disparaging story against the Covington HS students. Rather than retract, they ran an editor’s note 30 days later explaining some errors, but minimizing their responsibility.
The NYT ran an above the fold page one story alleging presidential candidate John McCain was having an affair with a lobbyist based only on them having had lunch together. The full retraction came much later, but was buried in the paper. Worse, at that same time, their journalists knew about the affair between Reillie Hunter and presidential candidate John Edwards, knew about the child, but they sank the story until it broke in another publication a year later.
What you’re describing is the ideal, the aspirational goal of ethical journalism. In practice, they’re falling short.
Like I wrote, your point remains valid.
I made this comment also on one of the reporter's videos.
There is also a responsibility to make sure that those who can't defend themselves and who have a suppressed position in society aren't taken advantage of. The fact that a foreign man can come into a situation and exert his will (for good or bad) with great affect, says something about the balance of power in this world. Those with power must have the capacity to have their power "checked" - that's what this is about to me.
Excellent topic guys, thanks for trying to shed some light on proper journalistic practices. As someone who has spent 25 years in photojournalism, I appreciate that you took the time to point out what is wrong with the video we all have seen and those types of videos being posted on the Internet. Keep up the good work!
Hello Ted.
I've been watching your program for several years.
Also find it incomprehensible that you have no program on the TV.
I watched this one-hour broadcast twice.
Firstly, because I am Dutch and live in the Netherlands, and I am already at a respectable age, so my English is not perfect.
So I have to listen carefully to your very fast way of communicating.
Secondly, because this broadcast was and is great.
Really friend I enjoy every broadcast that you do for the simple reason it is true, you have your affairs well organized and it is very interesting.
Friend, if I may call you that, definitely go on.
A heartfelt kind regards,
An amateur photographer from the Netherlands, Toine
P.S. Sorry for my poor English Ted, forgive me.
I've only seen a few of Northrup's videos, but he made me squirm even talking about Lightroom. Not a character for me.
Hi team,
Let's not crucify Northrup! He made a mistake, a big one. Let's not mince words here.
Steve McClurry can hold his own. By all means he is no Mother Theresa either!
Should Tony decide to call it a day on RUclips it will be a sad day indeed.
I for one started to cull a number of subscriptions to presenters who believe in their own hype and self indulgence. They are worse than Tony. Tony has done so much for the photographic community and yet we are preaching about best practice.
Take a look in the mirror and ask yourself one questions. Am I without sin?
I think the national G photography is more documentary photo than anything else. If you doubt It you should watch Werner Hertzogs view on docu. I think Nat G photo fits in it.
The only thing even slightly criticisable about Northrup's approach is that he does have a liberal multicultural ethical point of view that was reasonably new decades ago.
The original video is quite interesting, even if problematic, and I can't see that you've addressed the argument, viz. cultural insensitivity and photographic glamorisation.
Cultural insensitivity (in this case) cannot be addressed from halfway around the world sitting on a couch in Connecticut. Has he even been to Afghanistan?
Cultural insensitivity? That would be like ignoring how the culture has embraced the Afghan Girl photo and honoured Sharbat. The culture is changing and one should respect that instead of forcing if back into the stereotyped pigeonhole.
Photographic glamorisation? That's your subjective interpretation of what a young girl naturally looks like. No photo tells the truth. By its nature a photograph will crop out the world to frame a very specific perspective.
@@PrimePhilosophy cultural insensitivity is the least of the issue here, he violated her consent and exploited his position of power in a place that the girl thought she had privacy. I don't care and it is of no consequence how she feels about the photo today, the important point is she was angry and didn't want the photo taken at the time nor to show her face, that alone makes this photo a serious problem and Steve McCurry's actions under heavy scrutiny
Absolutely correct.
Great commentary guys. People need to be reminded that there is little to no investigative reporting in this age of instant news on social media. Keep up the good work.
This video holds up WaPo as an example of good investigative journalism. I would be curious what the hosts’
response is to Covington Catholic student story. They got this so wrong and continued to get it wrong despite publicly available contradicting evidence. So much so that they are getting a lawsuit.
I must be living under a rock... I did not know you have a podcast Ted
This is an excellent video and one that A LOT of people should watch/listen to. So many people merely take what they hear/see on TV and YT as fact when it is really just someones opinion.
I did watch the video in question and the followup video. Not impressed. I do believe Steve McCurry has been drug through the mud enough - yes, he gets his subjects to pose, but I've done the same, not under the guise of photo-journalism but as a content creator for whomever the work is for.
Keep up the great work Ted!!!!
You are doing the same, you should apply your own words "you should be better than this". Are you doing a hit piece? I guess you are not, but again it seems like it, so why do you accuse?... I'd would have rather seen a video that makes people move forward, not a video that makes hate keep spreading.
Yeah this video is a mess. And Forbes should take this video’s title as advice for himself. He needs to clearly state what he disagrees with, why he disagrees with it, and how he believe this issue ought to be evaluated through an objective lens. Also I would be interested in how he believes discrepancies in stories presented as fact should be confronted by news consumers when the publication and photojournalist have failed to respond in good faith to provide a response when confronted with what appears to be foundational discrepancies in a story.
There is one minute devoted to the Northrup video and fifty minutes devoted to the general problem with RUclips. Northrup's valuable criticism cannot be dismissed in one minute.
Artist Series is awesome! Art of Photography is honest and worth keeping. Ted and Sean Tucker are the two best photography (and maybe best overall) channels on RUclips. Keep up the great work Ted.
The problem is that as a viewer when you click a video you already done your part in pushing the algoritme (and do fake news) you can't go back since even if you go back and do a neg vote google will take that as a positive signal. A good example is the slow movement from clicks to watch time it might help and google/youtube might try to be better but its a game they probably can't win and they don't care (really) if they win since the only downside is then danger of brands becoming upset for placing their ads against content they don't like. The best advice probably to most people who start out to share their interest, fun, reviews is to warn them not to turn it into the way they make their money its a trap. Or find a format that hits a nerve for a while (like camera conspiracies) and hope he will be ok once that is over. I try to remember that every time i post a (badly) made video and make 4 euro's / day its about me sharing something that i hope helps someone at some point and try to use the feedback that is real (and that does happen) to see if i can report that back to a company and see if the next version can be better. I do the same thing for my work and they pay me well for it, so the youtube version has to stay for fun since i don't think there is a way now to avoid the trap. Just my 2 cents...
Ted The Artist Series is the best work that you do but I understood what happened. It’s like Keith Carter saying his his most personally satisfying work is often his least popular. Oh shucks.
Ted, How about publishing your Artist Series content in book form? RUclips and postings on the internet are intangible and quickly forgotten. I really like your work and would like to have it readily available to read. I've commented previously on my (frustrated) desire to find the videos. Tell me when the first copies are available please!! Kevin