Photojournalism is dead: "For god's sake, somebody call it!"

As a working newspaper photographer all I can say about this is...I agree.

dan c

http://www.epuk.org/Opinion/961/for-gods-sake-somebody-call-it

 

Yep. Sadly, photojournalism of any value truly bit the dust a long time ago and part of what contributed to that was the indifference of the public but also the lack of value within the very world it existed within (journalism). Tragic.

 

Sad but probably true.

 

I work for a newspaper and I've been surprised by the few good photos coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan over the years from the AP. Occasionally a couple crop up, but in general no really great art from those conflicts - especially when you think back to the stuff out of WWII. Perhaps its the slow demise of newspapers and magazines, but one of the things the Web delivers best in photos, so it's puzzling.

 

Maybe with the advent of digital photography the idea of making "every shot count" in a tight situation has been lost.

Quantity over quality. Dont think about 'the shot' just get everything.

Or "Oh just video it all real time and we'll take some screen grabs later!"

 

Photo & investigative journalism is dead now, 4 years on from when this thread was started. Most media these days are dominated by ideological opinion pieces, scaremongering and partisan fake outrage. There are still a few trustworthy holdouts out there, but the trend is very discouraging.

 

"Partisan fake outrage" comes from whichever side you don't agree with.

 

I also think that photojournalism has withered away now that nearly everyone is carrying a video recording device wherever they go. So instead of relying on professional photographers and journalists to capture stories now, they rely on the general public to capture the news. While we now have the advantage of being able to see so much more "as it happened," we also lose some of the artistry in a carefully composing a shot that can convey a story. A crude cell phone video of a plane crash will lead the news, while deeply emotional photos of the grieving families will be buried on page 12 in the newspaper.

 

Fake outrage is fake outrage.

The irony is that filmmakers are now copying the crappy quality shaky-cam style in theatrical movies to make things look more 'real'.

 

Newspapers and magazines are hurting severely, so probably some of the budget-cutting goes towards photography. If you can get photos of an event for low/no cost, and you're in an era of ever tightening budgets, do you pay a premium for good photos?

 

It can still serve as "people's exhibit A".

 

Photojournalism has been dying for decades; probably the first high-profile indication of its decline was the end of Life as a weekly publication in 1972.

 

The problem partly stems from the fact that the news media industry is shrinking.

Journalists covering stories now are sometimes expected to get and write the story for print, file audio cuts for radio, shoot video for websites and take still photographs -- all on one assignment.

In the past a photographer would be assigned to shoot pictures with a reporter. Two separate skill sets.

If you try to do everything quality is bound to suffer.

But there is still some great photojournalism happening out there. You'll know it when you see it.

 

It's funny, I'm re-watching Gilmore Girls, which was produced fairly recently, and Rory's great ambition is to go to an expensive ivy-league university to study journalism. Does any one do that these days given the state of journalism (and where it's going) and the insane student debts one would incur at such universities (especially if they didn't have wealthy grandparents!)? Seem so unrealistic now.

 

I lost my job seven years ago at the paper I worked for most of my adult life. I've had a ringside view of the slow decline ever since. I heard a great quote right after the Chicago Sun-Times laid off their entire photo staff and started teaching their reporters "iPhone Photography" in the aftermath. The quote was roughly "...we're witnessing the amateurization of a profession". This blog entry also summed it up pretty well: http://www.prophotoshow.net/2013/07/27/i-am-not-a-photographer/

 

Modern day photojournalism is TMZ. So, yeah, it's dead.