Question

How have the roles and purposes of photojournalists evolved during the past century?In what ways can the public rely on photography to tell the “truth” about historical events? How has modern technology like smart phones and social media affected the way we receive and perceive news events? Do you think news coverage on September 11th would have been different if smart phones were popular then?

Answer 1

Answer:

1. Photojournalism was a complex profession before, and today photographed pieces of evidence are much more commonplace
2. The public should always consider other information about the context of the photography before concluding the truth
3. Everyone can document news nowadays, which makes them more available, but also less reliable
4. Yes - it might have helped or created more anxiety and trouble, but if everyone could document the events of September 11th, the news coverage would be much different.

Explanation:

1. In the past, photojournalism was the profession available only to those who had formal equipment and licenses. Cameras weren’t readily available to all when they first appeared, they were expensive and heavy to carry around. These facts made it impossible for cameras to be available to all. They were also much more complicated to use, so only those who would train or educate themselves in the profession could eventually become photojournalists. Because of this, it was only the specific people who could capture a moment that could make the news and, one day, history. Photography was not as common as today, and people believed in it more because of it. Today it is much easier to take photographs, or even manipulate them, and everyone can add their documentations for news and events.
2. Because of the facts cited above, photography today is not considered to be entirely honest as it was thought before. There are many more photos, and only certain ones will be done without altering, photoshopping, or be worthy of the news and publicity. This being said, we shouldn’t take all the photos taken in the past as the evident truth. Photography was used in politics and propaganda before, as much as today, and we should always know the context of the photo before deciding what it tells us about a historical event. Some photography looks as it tells the full story, but the circumstances of it, or the time and place, can put it in an entirely different narrative.
3. In modern times when photography is readily available for all who have smartphones, it is taken for granted. Everyone can capture photos, and everything can be potential news. When we open any social media we are immediately overflown by the visual information of photography and videos telling us some story and convincing us of certain events. Everyone can document something that might be newsworthy and take the role of the photojournalist. Therefore, we have to be especially careful today what are we believing in, where the media comes from, and which media we want to consume. We also have to think about information overflown that can not only give us much unnecessary information and make us believe in the problem that doesn’t exist but also because of our mental health. If we get informational overflow and start believing everything we see, we can easily get too worried and distracted.
4. Yes, if people could document September 11th more easily with phones I believe things and news would be different. Perhaps there would be more information on how to help, maybe to save people and the firemen on the field, or maybe where one can find a secure place and help. Also, it would be easier to get what is happening. In moments of great tragedies, such as 9/11, people want all the possible information so they can realize what is happening, and calm the anxiety. It would be easier to know the cause and the results of the tragedy all around the world. However, it could be possible that the accessibility of smartphones would also raise panic, maybe give some false information, and spread anxiety as well. At this point, we can only speculate in which way would the change go, but news coverage would certainly be very different if more people could document the event.