Can photojournalists ask their subjects to pose?

[pulykamell]

@InvisibleWombat

Maybe part of the issue here is terminology. In the O.P., Carnac the Magnificent! seemed to use the words “photojournalist” and “photographer” interchangeably, and they’re not the same thing.

I have attended my share of events that have been photographed for the newspapers, and I can tell you they are frequently staged. Ribbon-cutting ceremonies are a perfect example, but everybody knows those photos are staged. My wife was doing some work for Miss America some years back, and the local newspaper was covering the event. They wanted an action shot with my wife, and I was working on her equipment at the time. The photographer asked me to please move aside so he could get the shot. My wife didn’t do anything differently, but I moved. Was that ethical?

I’ve had photographers tell me to straighten my tie, or take off my sunglasses (or whatever) before they took my picture for the newspaper. If they come up to me AFTER the event, and say “would you please stand over there and take off your coat for another picture?”, I think we’d all consider that manipulating the picture. But what if I’m walking up to the podium and a photographer says, “Hey, Wombat, ditch the hat”? Is that okay? What about when I’m standing at the lectern and someone says, “Look over here,” and then snaps a pic? Ethical?

These are the kinds of things that are done every single day by photographers all over the world.

In a news picture a photographer should not interfere at all. Period. “Ditch the hat,” “look over here,” etc. I consider unacceptable. For the feature that you mentioned before, I wouldn’t consider that direct staging or manipulation.

I would never ever interfere in any way with a news photo. (Except in that really difficult situation in which you have a news photo but are also the only person in a position to help a person in danger’s way. That’s a whole 'nother can of worms. My ethics would be to snap a picture or two and help the person, but there can be a lot of debate on this.)

[Nametag]

Pulykamell, the OP is clearly asking about feature photos, his use of the word “photojournalist” notwithstanding. The time spent composing your strenuous protests would be better spent explaining the difference between a news photo and a feature photo. For instance, the photos in the OP were not only NOT taken by photojournalists, and NOT news photos, but were probably provided by the subjects themselves.

[pulykamell]

@Nametag

Pulykamell, the OP is clearly asking about feature photos, his use of the word “photojournalist” notwithstanding. The time spent composing your strenuous protests would be better spent explaining the difference between a news photo and a feature photo. For instance, the photos in the OP were not only NOT taken by photojournalists, and NOT news photos, but were probably provided by the subjects themselves.

Dude, are we reading the same thread? I mentioned it twice:

Well, that’s a portrait not a news shot. For portraits and features you have more wiggle room. You’re usually allowed to pose portraits because they’re not news shots.

Oops. And specifically regarding the OP…The pictures you mentioned are feature portraits, not hard news, and are allowed to be posed.

I was trying to explain what was ethical in a NEWS shot, and then contrast that with FEATURE shots which are not news shots and subjects to different rules.
It’s easier to explain what is and isn’t allowable in newspaper photography when you first outline the rules for news shots, because they are the ones with fairly rigidly established ethics.

The protests were a tangent that the thread took. Somebody mentioned Joe Rosenthal, so I had to clear up that rumor. This is the Straight Dope after all.

And YES, the O’s photographs were very likely taken by photojournalists (they do do features & portraits as well, although newspapers often have feature and portrait specialists that freelance for them) and were almost certainly NOT provided by the subjects themselves.

[pulykamell]

@Nametag

Pulykamell, the OP is clearly asking about feature photos, his use of the word “photojournalist” notwithstanding. The time spent composing your strenuous protests would be better spent explaining the difference between a news photo and a feature photo. For instance, the photos in the OP were not only NOT taken by photojournalists, and NOT news photos, but were probably provided by the subjects themselves.

And secondly, if you would just read the OP and my responses instead of friggin’ jumping down my throat for providing information, you would realize that the OP is asking for the ethics in a whole host of situations, some news, some feature, some portrait, some in-between which require a more in-depth situation. Heck, the whole “What is feature/What is news?” question can be extended into several pages.

[Carnac_the_Magnificent]

@pulykamell

And secondly, if you would just read the OP and my responses instead of friggin’ jumping down my throat for providing information, you would realize that the OP is asking for the ethics in a whole host of situations, some news, some feature, some portrait, some in-between which require a more in-depth situation. Heck, the whole “What is feature/What is news?” question can be extended into several pages.

I appreciate the responses from everybody–“on a whole host of issues,” as you said. I mentioned “photojournalist” in my opening post, without knowing the difference between that and a photographer.

Many thanks to everybody. Great weekend, everybody!

[pulykamell]

I wouldn’t take too much issue with your terminology. A photojournalist is a photographer, and most photojournalists won’t object to that name. Photojournalist is just more specific. I generally use the words photographer or shooter myself even when speaking of news photographers. Most photographers on staff at a daily newspaper can be accurately called photojournalists.