Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 2ND COMING on September 04, 2009, 01:48:29 PM
-
Defense Secretary Robert Gates is objecting “in the strongest terms” to an Associated Press decision to transmit a photograph showing a mortally wounded 21-year-old Marine in his final moments of life, calling the decision “appalling” and a breach of “common decency.”
The AP reported that the Marine’s father had asked – in an interview and in a follow-up phone call — that the image, taken by an embedded photographer, not be published.
The AP reported in a story that it decided to make the image public anyway because it “conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it.”
The photo shows Lance Cpl. Joshua M. Bernard of New Portland, Maine, who was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade in a Taliban ambush Aug. 14 in Helmand province of southern Afghanistan, according to The AP.
Gates wrote to Thomas Curley, AP’s president and chief executive officer. “Out of respect for his family’s wishes, I ask you in the strongest of terms to reconsider your decision. I do not make this request lightly. In one of my first public statements as Secretary of Defense, I stated that the media should not be treated as the enemy, and made it a point to thank journalists for revealing problems that need to be fixed – as was the case with Walter Reed."
“I cannot imagine the pain and suffering Lance Corporal Bernard’s death has caused his family. Why your organization would purposefully defy the family’s wishes knowing full well that it will lead to yet more anguish is beyond me. Your lack of compassion and common sense in choosing to put this image of their maimed and stricken child on the front page of multiple American newspapers is appalling. The issue here is not law, policy or constitutional right – but judgment and common decency.”
The four-paragraph letter concluded, “Sincerely,” then had Gates’ signature.
The photo, first transmitted Thursday morning and repeated Friday morning, carries the warning, “EDS NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT.”
The caption says: “In this photo taken Friday, Aug. 14, 2009, Lance Cpl. Joshua Bernard is tended to by fellow U.S. Marines after being hit by a rocket propelled grenade during a firefight against the Taliban in the village of Dahaneh in the Helmand Province of Afghanistan. Bernard was transported by helicopter to Camp Leatherneck where he later died of his wounds.”
Gates’ letter was sent Thursday, after he talked to Curley by phone at about 3:30 p.m. Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said Gates told Curley: “I am asking you to reconsider your decision to publish this graphic photograph of Lance Corporal Bernard. I am begging you to defer to the wishes of the family. This will cause them great pain.”
Curley was “very polite and willing to listen,” and send he would reconvene his editorial team and reconsider, Morrell said. Within the hour, Curley called Morrell and said the editors had reconvened but had ultimately come to the same conclusion.
Gates “was greatly disappointed they had not done the right thing,” Morrell said.
The Buffalo News ran the photo on page 4, and the The (Wheeling, W.Va.) Intelligencer ran an editorial defending its decision to run the photo. Some newspapers – including the Arizona Republic, The Washington Times and the Orlando Sentinel – ran other photos from the series. Several newspaper websites – including the Akron Beacon-Journal and the St. Petersburg Times – used the photo online.
Morrell said Gates wanted the information about his conversations released “so everyone would know how strongly he felt about the issue.”
The Associated Press reported in a story about deliberations about that photo that “after a period of reflection,” the news service decided “to make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it.
“The image shows fellow Marines helping Bernard after he suffered severe leg injuries. He was evacuated to a field hospital where he died on the operating table,” AP said. “The picture was taken by Associated Press photographer Julie Jacobson, who accompanied Marines on the patrol and was in the midst of the ambush during which Bernard was wounded. … ‘AP journalists document world events every day. Afghanistan is no exception. We feel it is our journalistic duty to show the reality of the war there, however unpleasant and brutal that sometimes is,’ said Santiago Lyon, the director of photography for AP.
“He said Bernard's death shows ‘his sacrifice for his country. Our story and photos report on him and his last hours respectfully and in accordance with military regulations surrounding journalists embedded with U.S. forces.’”
The AP reported that it “waited until after Bernard's burial in Madison, Maine, on Aug. 24 to distribute its story and the pictures.”
“An AP reporter met with his parents, allowing them to see the images,” the article says. “Bernard's father after seeing the image of his mortally wounded son said he opposed its publication, saying it was disrespectful to his son's memory. John Bernard reiterated his viewpoint in a telephone call to the AP on Wednesday. ‘We understand Mr. Bernard's anguish. We believe this image is part of the history of this war.
The story and photos are in themselves a respectful treatment and recognition of sacrifice,’ said AP senior managing editor John Daniszewski.
“Thursday afternoon, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates called AP President Tom Curley asking that the news organization respect the wishes of Bernard's father and not publish the photo. Curley and AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll said they understood this was a painful issue for Bernard's family and that they were sure that factor was being considered by the editors deciding whether or not to publish the photo, just as it had been for the AP editors who decided to distribute it.”
The image was part of a package of stories and photos released for publication after midnight Friday. The project, called “AP Impact – Afghan – Death of a Marine,” carried a dateline of Dahaneh, Afghanistan, and was written by Alfred de Montesquiou and Julie Jacobson:
“The U.S. patrol had a tip that Taliban fighters were lying in ambush in a pomegranate grove, and a Marine trained his weapon on the trees. Seconds later, a salvo of gunfire and rocket-propelled grenades poured out, and a grenade hit Lance Cpl. Joshua ‘Bernie’ Bernard. The Marine was about to become the next fatality in the deadliest month of the deadliest year of the Afghan war.”
The news service also moved extensive journal entries AP photographer Julie Jacobson wrote while in Afghanistan. AP said in an advisory: “From the reporting of Alfred de Montesquiou, the photos and written journal kept by Julie Jacobson, and the TV images of cameraman Ken Teh, the AP has compiled ‘Death of a Marine,’ a 1,700 word narrative of the clash, offering vivid insights into how the battle was fought, and into Bernard's character and background. It also includes an interview with his father, an ex-Marine, who three weeks earlier had written letters complaining that the military's rules of engagement are exposing the troops in Afghanistan to undue risk.”
i think they took it down, even though they ignored the wishes of the family in the first place
pretty sick
-
The media has no conscience.
-
The media has no conscience.
Yeah, let's hide reality and pretend it's not even going on. ::)
-
Thats a US serviceman...Hugo take this shit down.
-
Pretty distasteful on the AP's part to release that after his family requested they didn't.
-
U miss the point asshole.....completely.
-
the picture should not be shown
-
Thanks Blacken now I can't hate u.
-
But people getting murdered in any other situation / manner is OK to show?
-
We don't do that here....that was a US Marine. Several of us here are or where Marines and we're not posting that shit. A link would have been fine but as with the AP stoy if that was ur kid or brother etc and his picture found its way to the net or the AP before u had been notified, thats bullshit and is not only disgraceful its also a major problem for the DOD as regards the family. U don't do that to people. I hope that embeded reporter gets bounced from theater.
-
horrible decision to run the image. WTF is wrong with them?
-
But people getting murdered in any other situation / manner is OK to show?
these people put their lives on the line for us. Even though I think they are often misused for bullshit wars and actions, this isn't the way to show that. I see no reason they need to be disrespectfully shown in their final moments of sacrifice. It would be like some guy trying to save you from a car accident then getting hit by a car in the process and you jumping up and taking film of him dying to upload on your blog. something distasteful and disrespectful about that.
-
Hugo..great example..I may have to use that. I think ur work here is done. Gold star for Hugo.
-
these people put their lives on the line for us. Even though I think they are often misuded for bullshit wars and actions, this isn't the way to show that. I see no reason they need to be disrespectfully shown in their final moments of sacrifice. It would be like some guy trying to save you from a car accident then getting hit by a car in the process and you jumping up and taking film of him dying to upload on your blog. something distasteful and disrespectful about that.
I'm not questioning that. But what's wrong with journalists actually reporting and telling it like it happens? They are not just putting up the picture for the sake of the picture, it is part of telling a story.
"The Associated Press is distributing a photo of a Marine fatally wounded in battle, choosing after a period of reflection to make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it."
-
these people put their lives on the line for us.
How?
-
How?
What?
-
I'm not questioning that. But what's wrong with journalists actually reporting and telling it like it happens? They are not just putting up the picture for the sake of the picture, it is part of telling a story.
"The Associated Press is distributing a photo of a Marine fatally wounded in battle, choosing after a period of reflection to make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it."
you need a picture to understand the story?
gotta wonder how they made it so long without pictures before the camera. :D
-
What?
Fighting a proxy war against talibans in Afghanistan is helping/saving America and Americans how?
I rather think they should be allowed to come home and spend their life with their families instead.
Hugo if you support this war, what are you doing here?
-
Fighting a proxy war against talibans in Afghanistan is helping/saving America and Americans how?
I rather think they should be allowed to come home and spend their life with their families instead.
Hugo if you support this war, what are you doing here?
A. I've already served, during the first gulf war.
and I guess you didn't read what I said above:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=296613.msg4233750#msg4233750
I do not support this war.
-
Yeah, let's hide reality and pretend it's not even going on. ::)
Nothing is being hidden. It's about respecting both the person who has been killed and that person's family.
-
If ur not sure...I refer u to 911. If we pull out we'll eventually face the same problems. Afghanistan can't be allowed to become a safe haven for AQ again. It can debated if that includes rebuilding the country, what kind of gov, who we go after, troop levels etc, etc but it can't be a problem again.
-
I think there's a good role for combat photography, I just think it needs to be considerate of people it serves. It's for our understanding, including the families of those affected. Do we really need to see the face and blood of a dying Marine to understand it? How will the family feel about their son plastered across the net on an AP story? The framing of it is all bad imo. cheap.
-
I'm not questioning that. But what's wrong with journalists actually reporting and telling it like it happens? They are not just putting up the picture for the sake of the picture, it is part of telling a story.
"The Associated Press is distributing a photo of a Marine fatally wounded in battle, choosing after a period of reflection to make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it."
His family asked them not to publish the pictures of their son dying. That alone is reason enough to not do it.
-
His family asked them not to publish the pictures of their son dying. That alone is reason enough to not do it.
QFT
how rare.
-
I think there's a good role for combat photography, I just think it needs to be considerate of people it serves. It's for our understanding, including the families of those affected. Do we really need to see the face and blood of a dying Marine to understand it? How will the family feel about their son plastered across the net on an AP story? The framing of it is all bad imo. cheap.
And sadly people often live in denial or shrug off what's really going on until they see the complete undeniable picture.
-
I think there's a good role for combat photography, I just think it needs to be considerate of people it serves. It's for our understanding, including the families of those affected. Do we really need to see the face and blood of a dying Marine to understand it? How will the family feel about their son plastered across the net on an AP story? The framing of it is all bad imo. cheap.
Combat Camera is for documenting and historical purposes and there are regs governing their use. But COMCAM is ours and we don't share those pics with the media, its a whole different thing. As Hugo said, this wrong and the AP, and in particular that guy will have a hard time covering stories without US assistance.
-
I'm a Michael Savage fan, but he pulled a similar stunt a few years back, and Colonel Dan Baggio of the Army personally e-mailed him and asked him to remove the pics.
You have to get the family's go-ahead first. Case closed.
-
And sadly people often live in denial or shrug off what's really going on until they see the complete undeniable picture.
that may be the case but their stupidity should not be at the expense of the dying serviceman or his/her family. If they're so stupid and lazy that they need cue cards, well, that's not much of an argument for the publication of the material in question.
-
Combat Camera is for documenting and historical purposes and there are regs governing their use. But COMCAM is ours and we don't share those pics with the media, its a whole different thing. As Hugo said, this wrong and the AP, and in particular that guy will have a hard time covering stories without US assistance.
stated better than I did, but what I meant to convey.
-
I didn't read all the posts so idon't know if it was already touched on but would any of you be ok if the AP posted the picture of the dying soilder if the family wasn't against it?
-
I didn't read all the posts so idon't know if it was already touched on but would any of you be ok if the AP posted the picture of the dying soilder if the family wasn't against it?
I wouldn't be okay with it. What would be the purpose?
-
I wouldn't be okay with it. What would be the purpose?
Why wouldn't you be ok with it if the family was?
-
Why wouldn't you be ok with it if the family was?
For the same reason I asked the question: what's the point? If the media wants to show a dying service member it's to make money or make a political point IMO.
-
For the same reason I asked the question: what's the point? If the media wants to show a dying service member it's to make money or make a political point IMO.
Why not a moral point in terms of sending men and women to die for some ever changing and sometimes shady objectives? Or sending them to die based on lies?
Don't you agree sometimes the public needs a good slap in the face with some reality to break them out of an apathetic daze or do you think people's hearts really bleed when they hear another upteen American soilders got blown to bits? Maybe I'm too cynical but I don't think people really truely give a shit becasue they are constantly sheilded from the consequence of war that our side experiences.
-
Why not a moral point in terms of sending men and women to die for some ever changing and sometimes shady objectives? Or sending them to die based on lies?
Don't you agree sometimes the public needs a good slap in the face with some reality to break them out of an apathetic daze or do you think people's hearts really bleed when they hear another upteen American soilders got blown to bits? Maybe I'm cynical but I don't think people really truely give a shit becasue they are constantly sheilded from the consequence of war that our side experiences.
Dude I don't think for one instant that the media has a shred of morality. You should read up on what they did to Arthur Ashe. That's when I truly realized how ruthless the media is. What you've described again sounds like someone trying to make a political point.
I understand what you're saying about the "slap in the face." People can be apathetic and at times oblivious to some things. But I don't believe the public is unaware of the harsh reality of war. The internet has allowed everyone to see all of the dirty details. It allowed me to watch the decapitation of Nicholas Berg, which I watched just so I could keep in mind what kind of animals we're dealing with.
There are plenty of other ways to get a point across to someone other than showing a dead or dying service member.
-
I think most people don't even know why we're fighting these wars anymore. It was Osama, it was WMD's, it was Taliban, it was Al qaeda, it was terror, it was Saddam, it was to help the Afghans, it was to help Iraq's, it was for oil, it was for American interests and on and on. They are overdosed on these nicely named objectives that don't always pan out only to hear about more objectives and longer wars. If the public witnessed a more personal connection to American soilder death don't you believe the people, through their elected officials would put more preasure on all the administrations to make better choices in how they deal with future confrontations?
I hope I was able to convey what I'm thinking clearly enough, it was a long day.
-
Ah nevermind man, I just relaized i'm repeating myself. lol yup, loooong day. :)
-
it's not a big deal, it's not exactly easy to pick a side where there are multiple arguments to consider. I've had a hard time with this issue at points. Even time is a factor, is it ok 20 years from now but not ok today. Not long ago we allowed pictures like this from Vietnam to be posted here. There is a multitude of considerations on an issue like this. It's not always so easy to side 100%. So I guess the best thing might just be to voice how you feel about this instance at this point in time. Maybe nobody did anything wrong in this thread. Maybe we all did.
-
There is a multitude of considerations on an issue like this. It's not always so easy to side 100%. So I guess the best thing might just be to voice how you feel about this instance at this point in time. Maybe nobody did anything wrong in this thread. Maybe we all did.
Do I need to take some shrooms before I think about this?
-
"The Associated Press is distributing a photo of a Marine fatally wounded in battle, choosing after a period of reflection to make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it."
Pretty much sums up the press doesn't it ?
That sentence clearly shows they have an agenda and used that picture to further their agenda, despite the wishes of the family.
These people are so up their own asses it's unreal.
-
Do I need to take some shrooms before I think about this?
do you? :-\
-
I think most people don't even know why we're fighting these wars anymore. It was Osama, it was WMD's, it was Taliban, it was Al qaeda, it was terror, it was Saddam, it was to help the Afghans, it was to help Iraq's, it was for oil, it was for American interests and on and on. They are overdosed on these nicely named objectives that don't always pan out only to hear about more objectives and longer wars. If the public witnessed a more personal connection to American soilder death don't you believe the people, through their elected officials would put more preasure on all the administrations to make better choices in how they deal with future confrontations?
I hope I was able to convey what I'm thinking clearly enough, it was a long day.
That's all fine and dandy, minus the fact that this guy's family asked them not to publish the pictures. Your agenda and disagreement with this conflict most likely means jack shit to them and in-fact, does mean jack shit. The family's wishes should be observed before anyone's agenda or money-grubbing tactics come into play.
The AP asked this guy's family if they were OK with the pictures being published. They said no. Right there they should have canceled any plans to publish them and buried it.
In reality, your no different from those papers you hate. You want to push your agenda by publishing those pictures and seem to think it's OK to, regardless of what the family wants. Apparently the wishes of the parents of a son who died take second place to yours, despite the fact that you have no personal relationship to him and only want to use his pictures to further your anti-war agenda.
The funny thing is that I would bet on my life that anyone on this board would have said no as well had it been photos of their child dying.
-
That's all fine and dandy, minus the fact that this guy's family asked them not to publish the pictures. Your agenda and disagreement with this conflict most likely means jack shit to them and in-fact, does mean jack shit. The family's wishes should be observed before anyone's agenda or money-grubbing tactics come into play.
The AP asked this guy's family if they were OK with the pictures being published. They said no. Right there they should have canceled any plans to publish them and buried it.
In reality, your no different from those papers you hate. You want to push your agenda by publishing those pictures and seem to think it's OK to, regardless of what the family wants. Apparently the wishes of the parents of a son who died take second place to yours, despite the fact that you have no personal relationship to him and only want to use his pictures to further your anti-war agenda.
The funny thing is that I would bet on my life that anyone on this board would have said no as well had it been photos of their child dying.
Beach and I were talking about families that wouldnt have an issue with pictures of their loved one being published.
-
Beach and I were talking about families that wouldnt have an issue with pictures of their loved one being published.
I still don't see the point of plastering the pages of papers with the pictures of dying soldiers. Everyone knows the horrors of war. We've all seen hundreds, if not thousands, of pictures. The only reason to plaster papers and the like with the images of dying soldiers would be to further an agenda.
Then again, if you're ok with that, then you should have no problem with papers printing beheading photos and what not, right?
-
I still don't see the point of plastering the pages of papers with the pictures of dying soldiers. Everyone knows the horrors of war. We've all seen hundreds, if not thousands, of pictures. The only reason to plaster papers and the like with the images of dying soldiers would be to further an agenda.
Then again, if you're ok with that, then you should have no problem with papers printing beheading photos and what not, right?
If you don't see the point then theres not much else I should bother saying.
-
If you don't see the point then theres not much else I should bother saying.
Your point is pretty stupid so yeah, you probably should stop talking.
-
Your point is pretty stupid so yeah, you probably should stop talking.
When you're a miserable douchebag, everything seems stupid.
-
i think they took it down, even though they ignored the wishes of the family in the first place
pretty sick
The media should be consequence neutral.
Eg, publishing issues should not be decided on how the public reacts.
How the big media outlets have been shamelessly promoting the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a good example.
Would there still be a war over there if the journalists would report about every killed soldier, every civil person slayed?
Doubt it.
-
We don't do that here....that was a US Marine. Several of us here are or where Marines and we're not posting that shit. A link would have been fine but as with the AP stoy if that was ur kid or brother etc and his picture found its way to the net or the AP before u had been notified, thats bullshit and is not only disgraceful its also a major problem for the DOD as regards the family. U don't do that to people. I hope that embeded reporter gets bounced from theater.
We agree.
-
The media should be consequence neutral.
Eg, publishing issues should not be decided on how the public reacts.
How the big media outlets have been shamelessly promoting the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a good example.
Would there still be a war over there if the journalists would report about every killed soldier, every civil person slayed?
Doubt it.
I agree. The deciding factor of the public's reaction to those pics will be how they feel about the case for going to war in the first place. It's no different then Vietnam, after the footage and pics came out the public openly starting asking, "What the hell are we doing over there." I think the same thing would happen with these wars as well, but you never know, I guess it could have the opposite effect and cause the public to support the conflicts even more.
-
We agree.
:o
-
Palin calls news org 'heartless and selfish'
Posted: September 7th, 2009 12:50 PM ET
(CNN) – Sarah Palin is calling the AP's decision to release a battlefield photo of a dying Marine over the family's objection "an evil thing to do."
In a Sunday night post on her Facebook page, the former Alaska governor called the photo released this week of Lance Corporal Joshua Bernard's dying moments on the battlefield in Afghanistan a "sacred image."
"Many of us join Secretary Gates in condemning the Associated Press for its heartless and selfish decision to turn its back on the wishes of a grieving family in order to exploit the tragic death of a true American hero," she wrote.
The release of the photo was "a despicable and heartless act by the AP," said Palin. "The family said they didn't want the photo published. AP, you did it anyway, and you know it was an evil thing to do.
"Our thoughts and prayers are with the Bernard family. …"
Palin has had limited public appearances since resigning the governor's office in July. Most of her comments have come via posts on her Facebook page.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/07/palin-calls-news-org-heartless-and-selfish/#more-67625
-
I think ALL images of war should be made public
let's see what we're getting for our tax dollars
this would include pictures of our soldiers, their soldiers, civilans, etc...
I think if we saw what wars really looked like we might give them a little more thought
BTW - does anyone remember looking at books when they were a kid of images of our dead soldiers from Vietnam and WWII
The WWII stuff was in books from Time Magazine in my elemenatry school library
-
the pic should be shown....
its easy to eat a rare steak when you have NEVER seen a cow getting slaughtered....and then brag about it
its easy to talk about soldiers dying when you have never seen anyone die....and then brag about being patriotic
if you cant even look at a fucking pic of someone dying....you'll appreciate how much of a sacrifice the soldier made by giving his life...
and also realize how useless you'd be in combat.....first time someone dies..you'd run off like a puss
-
I think ALL images of war should be made public
let's see what we're getting for our tax dollars
this would include pictures of our soldiers, their soldiers, civilans, etc...
I think if we saw what wars really looked like we might give them a little more thought
BTW - does anyone remember looking at books when they were a kid of images of our dead soldiers from Vietnam and WWII
The WWII stuff was in books from Time Magazine in my elemenatry school library
I remember those Time books. I looked them over when I was young enough to not even know what that stuff meant.
-
I remember those Time books. I looked them over when I was young enough to not even know what that stuff meant.
Do you remember the picture of the japanese guy with his head on a post?
I remember national geographic (I think) where this Vietamese woman was holding a dead child by the leg and it's guts were hanging out and I think she was throwing it on a pile of bodies
I saw that in the 2nd or 3rd grade and I remember it today
-
Do you remember the picture of the japanese guy with his head on a post?
I remember national geographic (I think) where this Vietamese woman was holding a dead child by the leg and it's guts were hanging out and I think she was throwing it on a pile of bodies
I saw that in the 2nd or 3rd grade and I remember it today
I don't remember anything really vivid like that. A friend of my parents had the collection and I remember pictures of bodies lying on the ground and shit. I think I was arounnd grade 1-2 when I saw those books. I also remember the Saturday morning TV shows on the Vietnam war. I was probably around 12-13 I think when I saw that scene where the American soilder shoots the Vietnamese guy in the head, I nearly shit my pants.