Can anyone explain how it was that photographer Chip Somodevilla was able to get a photo of Rep. Joe Wilson in the middle of his two-syllable “You lie!” heckle? Of roughly 535 members of Congress in the chamber at the time, why would the photographer be aiming his camera at Wilson, and have him centered and in focus, at that moment?
I searched for any news story with a “How I got the shot” account from Somodevilla, but haven’t found one.
Or am I being overly suspicious about the spontaneity of that outburst?
That shot has been paired with the “You Lie!” comment, but there is no way to independently prove it was snapped at the same time as the infamous outburst. Joe was worked up all night, so it could have been taken at any time. A still picture can appear to be taken in mid shout, but really just be laughing, breathing or any open-mouth instant.
That’s what I was thinking. I’m not an expert at how the mouth forms for certain parts of speech (at least not able to look at a photo and tell if he’s saying “LIE” or "AWWW, Look at the puppies!). But it’s probably just clever placement.
From the audio it sounds like he was making noises before he shouted “You Lie!”, so the photographer(s) may have already been pointing towards him before the shout.
From the audio clip I’ve heard played on NPR, it sounds like someone in the audience says, “You lie!” twice. As I recall it, the President starts that bit saying that illegal aliens won’t have rights to healthcare under the new plan, then reinforces it a bit later with something more forceful, like “No illegal aliens will receive healthcare benefits under the new system.” When the President says it the first time, you can hear some commotion and what I think is the first “you lie!” utterance. Later, after the President’s second reinforcement, the “You lie!” is a lot louder and clearer.
It’s likely that the first bit of commotion attracted the photographer’s attention, then he was able to get the shot on the second yell. At least, IMO.
I’d say that’s unlikely, given the fairly shallow depth of field. If the shot was taken with a wide angle lens, giving wide coverage, then all rows would be in focus. In the actual photo, the focus is clearly on Wilson.
Plus, the shot seems pretty detailed, not what you would expect from a blown-up crop of a much larger shot.
I did a search of the photographer, to see what in his work would indicate a particular aptitude to that sort of shot, but didn’t see anything out of the norm for a good photojournalist, other than he knows the DC milieu. (An odd thing I did find was that you can get on Google someone’s Amazon wishlist, and his was really good reads, but, man ,who knew that can come up on a search? Yikes.)
At any rate, I’ll vouch as a former photojournalist, small scale, that if you know your subject and territory well, you are really hyperfocused and tuned into what’s going on at the scene. It’s not at all like you just take “snapshots” of what’s happening: you are very focused on the entire scene, and know your subject/“prey”. From what I’ve discerned, after the fact, there was dissent among the Repuplicans, some holding placards, and, if I were the photographer, and saw that rustling dissent, I’d focus in on it, figuring something was bound to happen, especially if in watching, saw it building up. Some luck, perhaps, in getting that exact shot, but good instincts on the photographer’s part in knowing where the shot might be. And, if Somodevilla was an old DC hand, he was at the right place, and, important, had access to the best place for the photo. Not just luck, you have to work for that.
It’s a great, if sad, photo, and may go down in history as one that shows the state of American politics in 2009.
Have you seen the photo? He’s not laughing or just breathing.