Everyone Is A Photographer
By Jim Hubbard
January 14, 2010
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Where are the images of Haiti, by Haitians?
- Everyone Is A Photographer
By Jim Hubbard 
South LA Street, by Khaliq Farthing, age 15 (2009)
Decades before the advent of digital technology and cell phones equipped with cameras, working photographers were often insulted by the growing perception that everyone was a photographer. Proof was often provided by such statements as, “Anyone can take a picture—all they have to do is push a button.” For the serious photojournalist creating images of news events, or for the documentary photographer engaged in in–depth and long–term projects, taking pictures was a calling, not just a job and not, certainly, just pointing and shooting.
This paper discusses two groups of novice image makers whose photographs are, increasingly, used by the media, studied by academe, and seen by millions of viewers around the world: citizen photojournalists and individuals involved in “participant photography” programs. Both create photos that they hope will reach a broad public, although the image creation methods and their goals may differ.
“Citizen journalism” is a term coined in the last several years to describe individuals who, whether using cell phone or consumer pro cameras, record events that they consider newsworthy, submitting their images to news outlets, blog sites, or other Internet or print venues, in the hopes of seeing their work published. Participant photography is a precursor to citizen photojournalism and differs from it in that images tend to be generated primarily, although not exclusively, by youth through special projects or ongoing programs to either depict social issues affecting the project participant’s life, such as poverty, health, or violence, or to paint a broader, more human portrait of a community. Both represent images that have been created by everyday people with cameras in their hands.
To read this paper in its entirety, please download the attached PDF below. I invite you, also, to weigh–in with your comments and to read the comments of students in my class Visual Communication and Social Change, which will post over the next several weeks.
Everyone Is A Photographer
I was immediately inspired by this essay and by the idea of participant photography. As I plan to begin as an inner city educator in the fall of 2012, I hope that I can continue to learn about participant photography and bring an opportunity like those outlined in the essay to my students. I am intrigued by the concept and am inclined to get involved in this legendary process!
One thing that struck me was the mention of those who oppose PP projects. Some wonder why these PP projects are focusing on bringing photography and art to the poor when they could be providing food, shelter, or resources. For one, I agree with Hubbard that these children, however malnourished and poorly off, deserve to engage with art and explore their creativity and artistic skill. Photography provides these students with the ability to stretch their minds and look critically at the world around them. I also agree that their work is valuable in that it is (in certain cases) catching the attention of a more fortunate public and even sometimes policy makers. I hotly disagree with the opposition also because solving homelessness, malnutrition, and joblessness is an unrealistic goal for one charitable organization. Although PP projects cannot exactly be viewed as “teaching a man to fish,” since photographic skill is not marketable in slum communities, they do provide struggling people with diversion and creative education, two things that are absent without external help.
To me, the talk about citizen journalism was less shocking, but also very interesting. As the world is changing and jobs are scarce in this country, it seems to be a growing theme in the business world that in-house workers are losing their jobs to outsourcing. In this case, magazines, newspapers, blogs, and TV stations outsource to the general public, urging citizens to do the work that their self-hired photojournalists once did.
The field of photography is changing, giving citizens the power to contribute and offering exciting new opportunities to the disadvantaged.
While this article is interesting, I assure you it is the cynic in me that first selected the line on page three “The trend toward using images from the general public may reflect a real desire for citizen engagement. Or, it may be an attempt to simply appear savvy and engaged as a way to increase viewership. Or, as many pro photographers feel, it may simply reflect a means for increasing revenues by downsizing photography staff, while having unlimited use of uncredited photographs, for free.”
I absolutely believe that publications support the use of participative photographs because it makes the budget easier to balance while concurrently engaging viewers and drawing them back to the publication. This is unfortunate for individuals who have chosen to make photography, specifically photojournalism, their career. With the surplus of technologies and communication mediums available today, everyone is able to participate in sharing information and visually communicate the life surrounding them. Business are ultimately concerned about the bottom line and are absolutely capitalizing on participative photography.
That being said, organizations which have sprung up due to this interest in participant photography has increased the amount of information and points of view we have access to. Especially, encouraging unprivileged youth to participate in the arts is an amazing undertaking. While businesses may be profiting from the increase in participant photography, exposing children and unprivileged individuals to the arts is an excellent opportunity for these people to grow within their own creativity. It also opens a new avenue for people to find a way to express themselves, share their stories, and possibly even progress their own lives.
According to Paulo Freire, photography is a medium, which helps a community reflect back upon itself revealing everyday realities that influence their lives. I believe that the main purpose of photography is storytelling; every picture has a reason behind it, either from the eyes of the photographer or from the element being photographed. Both participatory photography and citizen journalism are powerful mediums of storytelling, having the same goal or objective. However I think that the reason behind each “category” is completely different.
While citizen journalism is important and key to media outlets the reason behind it isn’t as sincere or credible as participant photography. I believe that PP is more convincing since it truly captures the reality from both sides of the camera. People who have the opportunity to immerse in PP feel the need to not only inform viewers about their community but to persuade viewers to fight for a change. While some argue that certain forms of PP are geared towards reaping benefits, such as Zana Briski’s “Born into Brothels”, I completely disagree. Briski’s sole purpose was to create awareness and strive for change. Her documentary was so engaging and powerful that it was rightfully recognized.
Even though there are multiple PP programs around the world, I still believe that it is a refreshing way of informing and creating awareness of different global communities. Participant photography is self-representational, truthfully portraying situations and feelings. While an outsider is capable of taking the same picture, the story behind that picture can be totally distorted to fit his/her needs. Yet, when someone from inside captures a moment, that picture is meaningful and holds sensitivity and emotions that only someone from within can describe.
Due to the fact that our modern technology provides us with the ability to always be able to capture a story, event, or situation, participatory photography is no longer a controversial matter. It is a practice or rather a concept which is now a reality. Mobile devices are now always equipped with digital cameras, regardless of how poor the quality may be. This customary addition to our personal technologies has forced open the door for participatory photography, no matter how professionals or opponents of this idea may wish to contest it. And because of the way in which photography technology has provided the average civilian with the capability to take pictures in addition to publish them via the internet internationally, the practice of photography has permanently transformed.
I acknowledge that there is a difference between the work of a professional in regards to its polish, logistics, and overall aesthetic, but when examining a photograph pertaining to its illustrative quality, by who it was taken and how much photography experience that person may have is irrelevant. Art by definition is a solely an expression or production of what is beautiful or more than ordinary. And journalism by definition is the collection of news for presentation. Therefore there is no one right or more correct way to capture a moment. Although professionally trained press may be able to make a photograph seem genuine, someone who is capturing their own reality and documenting their own environment is able to provide true insight to a situation.
I strongly believe in the idea of providing the disadvantaged with the ability to illustrate their reality through engaging with art. Even though some may disagree that people in need should solely be supplied with necessary means such as food, clothing, and shelter, because even though art may not cure rough situations, it is just as crucial.
There were several ideas that struck me in the essay. The first is the notion that image quality is less relevant in today’s photography environment. Due the Internet, it is true that we are more overwhelmed with images and information than ever before. Photographs of almost anything can be found in search engines, and so one can agree that photography has lost some of its glory—the glory described when a family would wait for its issue of Life Magazine to arrive in the mail. However, I do not feel this means that image quality is less important today. Although there is an absurd amount of value put on silly images such as paparazzi pictures (which require no more skill than being at the right place at the right time), today’s mass volume of images should only up the ante and call for more quality.
It is in this context that participatory photography is especially relevant today. Everyone can be a photographer, but not everyone can offer a different perspective. Participatory photography offers unconventional yet undeniable quality. As mentioned in the essay, a documentary photographer will always be an outsider, no matter how long he or she studies the community. Someone who lives in the community itself can simply see and offer views no one else can. The images the insider provides are the closest the outsiders will ever get to the insider’s reality.
Not only does a program like IPE benefit its participants, but it grossly benefits its audience as well. The argument that impoverished children should first be offered food and shelter and then art programs lacks any insight into the human spirit. Giving a person a sense of purpose and need in the world is just as valuable as giving him or her something to eat.
Incredibly insightful piece! I am always inspired by participatory culture and I think that you helped shed some new light on the subject. In our technologically advanced world, it is impossible to stop the public from participating in the media. The lines between audience and producer are being blurred as the years progress. The photojournalist industry is no different. I noticed that the photos you described and showed were photos taken by people whose names I know. That speaks to the fact that they are extremely popular.
I really enjoyed the “outsider” versus “insider” perspective. I think it is important to realize that no matter how closely bound one is to a community, event, etc. once they are disassociated with that place, they become an outsider. We often forget that those who are disenfranchised, less fortunate, etc .have stories that get overlooked because they may not be as interesting as others. Through projects like “Shooting Back” the focus was brought back to pure, genuine artistry. This kind of art has become notorious because it offers the same story told through different lenses. Likewise, I admire the fact that you discussed how it is also important to capture human beings expressing joy and intimacy.
I, too, often feel like the notion of “anyone can…..” is one that frightens and angers me. I hear my colleagues say that with the advent of platforms like YouTube, upcoming journalists are going to have to struggle to get recognized. Now that anyone with a computer and any form of a camcorder can be reporters (citizen journalists), it is a tough time for students, like me, to compete. I think you hit the nail on the head when you discussed how the photos taken using camera phones are sometimes preferred over professional photography because they organically capture the moment without any smokescreens. Indeed, Participatory Photography is the precursor to Citizen Journalism. And we, “the professionals”, are going to have to embrace and accept it.
As mentioned on page 6 of this article, the rapid expansion of the possibilities within the internet has consequently drawn people away from newspapers and magazines. Because the internet has the capacity to hold infinitely more images than print publications, and because the quality is also much better, that has shortened the attention span of the modern individual. As opposed to examining a single picture like people used to in “Time” and “National Geographic”, they now scavenge through hundreds of photographs online. In doing so, I believe that photo journalism has lost its value as an art form, and has created a means of merely storytelling. Because people spend less time examining a single photo, it is very unlikely for one to inspect an image as an individual piece of art.
I can definitely speak for myself. As I visit news sites such as Yahoo! News and ABC7, I quickly glance over the images from stories merely to get a sense of the stories - not to appreciate the work of the photo journalists. I feel as though given the increased pace of life due to technological advancements, people just don’t have the time to respect photography as they used to.
There is another point I’d like to tackle. Not to invalidate the work of photojournalists and documentary photographers, but I believe that participant photography produces a much greater quality of work. When photojournalists or documentary photographers report a specific story by going into a foreign place or situation, they are merely outsiders. The dynamic between these photographers and the people of the region (those affected) is certainly not genuine. They might be reluctant to let this foreigner in, thereby creating a sense of tension and unfamiliarity within the context of the images. On the contrary, participant photography aims to bridge that gap. They are taken by those affected: the children who are homeless, the women suffering from AIDS, or the men addicted to drugs. They welcome the cameras as the cameras welcome them. They take pictures out of their everyday struggles just as they know it, not by just an outsider who has done some online research before tackling an issue. And for this reason, I encourage and welcome this emergence of participant photography, and am enthusiastic about the possibilities that lie ahead.
Society is always at a contradictory state. On one hand people love to claim they support the arts and on the other, the evolution of mechanisms to produce art has created a group that claims art is dead. Citizen journalism as Hubbard points out is not a new activity, but has merely become easier to do. The access to real-time postings of accidents and other events by normal people has benefitted society. We can now receive more information then ever before. Does this create trouble in the professional sphere? I do not think so for quality news print vehicles want the dramatic, well-produced images. A person capturing a traffic accident on the 405 and sending it to news stations can hardly be compared to an Edward Weston. Likewise, images used on blogs do not compare to the quality of images from National Geographic.
Until reading this article and attending class, I had never heard of participant photography. The idea seems so simple and a natural flow for what an artist should want to create. I feel that many photographers do see things through “rose-colored glasses” or, in many, very dark colored glasses. Images are framed and shot to give a particular aesthetic from an outsiders view point. Giving a child a camera to let him take pictures of his world is brilliant, for it creates a genuine story of life through a child’s eyes. Opponents of participant photography fail to realize the essence of art which is ultimately just to create some emotion. The images from the children certainly convey that.
While corporations fail to realize the importance of using participant photography to provoke social change, I believe that in time and with more projects, more people will come to understand this powerful art form. Less fortunate children have a right to express themselves and tell a story too, and maybe that will lead to a better society.
This paper puts precedence to the evolving world of participatory photography by focusing on generating content on America’s marginalized groups. The title, “Everyone is a photographer,” is more then just a well-written piece trying to accentuate the notion of participatory photography; it stands as a precursor to the future of photography, not only the evolving art of photography but also how it parallels the direction mass culture is taking. In a class I took last semester, I read a piece by Tyler Cowen and his views on capitalism and its effects on fostering creativity and artistic inspiration. A capitalistic society gives it populace the means and availability of attaining technology. Professor Hubbard wrote that with “plunging technology costs, easy access to cameras, and internet distribution have diminished barriers to entry” that previously existed. Lower costs gives the populace access to once unattainable photographic apparatus. It gives the poor and marginalized groups the chance to relay their experiences to the broader public through the photos they produce, photos that capture something sadly beautiful, their lives and experiences. But it’s not only the underprivileged that benefit from participatory photography, the broader public get an insider look at the lives of their fellow Americans that have been previously been ignored.
Photography is a readily available commodity that gives the average person the ability to document and communicate their lives. It is growing into a way of documenting daily experiences rather than hallmarks of special events and holidays, highlighting the menial everyday events. As participatory photography advances and continues to grow the art and study of photography begins to decline because of its ubiquity and integration into masses. The people’s ability to produce their own photography degrades the legitimacy by making the profession of photography commonplace and generic.
Photography often has a dual purpose: self-expression and storytelling. Because it can be seen as an industry and as a hobby, I can understand the tension that has existed between professionals and novices as technology has progressed. With more opportunities to access cameras and share images, photography has taken a change for the better. Not only can more stories be told across cultures and subcultures, but on-the-spot news shots can be taken even if a professional cannot make it to the scene. When examining this shift in photography, it’s important to look at the broader purpose of photojournalism: to convey/tell a story with pictures. It should be more important that the story gets told then who takes the picture. Although it may be hard for some photojournalists to share the stage with citizen photojournalists or participatory photographers, I think it is refreshing and invaluable to look through the lenses of novices. While the quality and framework of an image may not be up to professional par, it is enlightening to see individuals express themselves and the situations they encounter through photography. Because we are, by and large, a visual society, the expansion of photography has the potential to continue to educate and enlighten even broader audiences.
Participatory photography (PP) is one of the most hands-on, inspiring and effective social experiences I’ve heard of. With the potential to evoke political, social and economic change, participatory photography combines opportunity and art in a way that can empower marginalized people. PP has not only widened camera lenses but it has widened the lens through which many people see society. Exposure, alone, to situations of poverty, homelessness, violence, and other social injustice, is the first step to achieve social change. Once a situation has been exposed, people have the opportunity to take action and make change for the better.
With technology advancing and access to it growing, I see plenty of room for PP to reach untapped marginalized groups. Especially with the development of new media outlets and technology, more voices can be heard and more stories can be told than ever before. Rather than dwelling on the issue of who gets credit for the picture, photojournalists and novices should focus their energy on the bigger picture: creating artistic expression, sharing stories with society and helping other to gain a voice.
I believe we are living in a profoundly unique time, when communication through media technologies is the foundation for everyday activities. Never has there been such availability of information and because of this we, as a culture in the U.S. , are supremely saturated and perhaps distracted and disillusioned by the constant stream of images and information that we have lost the ability to make significant meaning out of simple symbols. There is so much trivial information and so many frivolous images constantly surrounding us in the globalized world via the internet, television, billboards, newspapers, magazines and the like, that I feel it is becoming increasingly difficult to feel emotionally connected to subjects and information because we are not capable of processing such abundance. This brings up the point to why participant photography is so important. In a world where so many images and information contain no message, no emotion, here is an art, an opportunity for us to look into the lives of others as a means to gain insight into a life or time we might have never known and perhaps could not have understood from an outside perspective.
I, as a USC student, am spoiled and ignorant about what struggle actually means in the grand universe and after reading this article am reminded that just down the block from my pristine and gated campus, lies an underbelly of a world I am not privy to. For me to take my digital camera down the block and shoot the neighborhood as a means of supplying a glimpse into the community would be a transgression. I would of course focus on the poverty and trash and therefore miss the human element that gives life and meaning to the community.
This is exactly why I am a believer, after reading this article, that participant photography is extremely important. My worldview is different from the boy living 10 blocks down so why on earth would I be able to capture in image what his life looks like. Participant photography in this way, absolutely, as the article mentions, rekindles “a long–standing controversy about whether the “outsider”—the photojournalist or documentary photographer—represents or distorts the lives of others.”
As the praised Brazilian educator Paulo Freire commented, participatory photography is about promoting individual change, community quality of life, and policy changes aimed at achieving social equity. Freire believes that these key aspects of life are brought forth through the medium of photography. In a world where our technology evolution is growing at a raid rate, and where this idea of “Everyone is a photographer” is now quickly becoming the way of society, we get consumed by the very technology we have created, and in essence, lost the meaning or importance of how vital photography is to our society. It captures not only a moment in time, but an emotion, a critical story that rather would be lost without the use of a nearby camera and a quick movement of the trigger finger. However like stated, so many pictures flood our eyes on the internet, that we sometimes lose hold of artistic beauty and can even do as much as to pass over an image that truly has a symbolic imagery, that is either very close to our own heart as a reflection of our life, or is an image taken by a professional who worked years with a people to capture their lives and educate us. Simply we miss these photos sometimes because of the chaos of our own technology era.
However, reading this article and learning about the rapid success of PP, or participatory photography, has shown me that there is still much to learn about the people of our world through the act of snapping a camera. The photo exhibits like Shooting Back, featuring the homeless children, gave America a unique perspective on life, a perspective that other wise would never have been documented if it were not for the simple task of giving a homeless child a camera. Like Professor Hubbard said in the article, it is important to give people who are deprived of the small things in life that the privileged have, an opportunity like holding a camera sometimes instead of simply giving food. These people want to share their stories, and I believe there is no stronger and more effective way to help a people than to allow them to completely unveil and allow others to discover their emotions and stories through the process of photography. The photos only act to make others have an emotional reaction which than makes people motivated to help.
To conclude, even though technology has become chaotic in the sense that at any given moment most of us can snap a photo, I am optimistic that this will turn into a positive for society rather than a negative. Yes sometimes this ability can ruin a person’s privacy, but on the other end of the spectrum, all these ways to take photos allows us to see into world’s and societies that we would not have had the opportunity without this boom in technology.
To professional photojournalists, cites this article, “‘snapping shots’ for publication is as absurd as giving someone paint and canvas and calling them a great artist.” Of course there is no question as to whether or not photography is an art; there is without a doubt a technical and visual art to photography, as demonstrated by some of the world’s most talented photographers. However, photography, in its simplest sense, is a still image of a moment in time captured through the eyes of an individual. There is little difference between the “quality” of an image’s content taken by an amateur and one taken by a professional. Indeed, art is subjective; if we can call paint splattered on a canvas art and hang it in the MOMA, then surely we can consider the amateur cell phone shot of the airplane in the Hudson a display of photographic art. In my opinion, the art of photography, for the most part, has more to do with the content of the image, rather than the lighting or the angle. This is why when I read the phrase “high-caliber” in this article, I begin to wonder exactly what “high-caliber” really means.
The underlying message of this article, quite simply, is that anyone and everyone can be a photographer. Canon PowerShot point and shoot cameras are in the handbags or pockets of virtually every individual on the USC campus, and campuses around the country. Flickr.com houses a truckload of “high-caliber,” high-quality photo images that are available to everyone online, either for viewing or for download. The world is so interconnected, thanks to globalization and technology, that images are no longer exclusive, nor should they be. National Geographic accepts submissions for “photos of the day,” requesting citizen photos which, once submitted, become the rights of National Geographic. So, we see that the world of images is becoming less and less about ownership and prestige and more about community sharing and awareness.
Image quality is most definitely not diminished if it is taken by a homeless boy or by James Nachtwey, although this depends on how you define quality. Of course, James Nachtwey’s technical quality based on his experience with a camera and the equipment available to him will obviously be superior to that of the boy in Washington D.C. who has never held a camera before. However, the content and the perspective behind photos are certainly not inferior. Not only does participant photography bring awareness, as this article outlines, but it also empowers those behind the cameras, allowing them to become a part of the global community from which they may have felt disconnected before. Especially when it comes to news and to documenting important events, I would much rather see how the mother of three who has just lost her home sees the aftermath of a giant earthquake than how the CNN photojournalist who has no emotional or physical ties to the country is capable of seeing it.
Rachel Tobias
COMM 451
Perpetual inundation of images, and the diminished meaning of individual images, is a running theme in discussions of digital convergence culture, where the line drawn between producer and consumer becomes blurred or nonexistent. Professional filmmakers and photographers fear that with the proliferation of consumer cameras, their art and very livelihood is under siege - that their work will become lost in a sea of untrained (and thus uninteresting or noteworthy) imagery.
That fear, while understandable, seems to me to be overly alarmist and fatalist. Without the printing press, the world may never have been subjected to Dan Brown, but neither would it have known Shakespeare, not to the same extent. While increased access to production may allow us to take many works for granted, it also allows those with limited means an opportunity to make their voice heard - and if it is important or noteworthy enough, it still will be. Jim’s project is proof positive of that fact.
Photography and filmmaking are by nature subjective, even if they purport to “capture” reality (a sentiment perfectly expressed in the closing quote of this article), and they offer a unique means of expression, using images culled from reality to tell a certain story, to show a unique perspective. While the number of voices expressing themselves may be multiplying exponentially, surely that’s not a bad thing, as stories that would once have gone untold have the opportunity to be made known, new perspectives are developed and old ones challenged, and the currency of images is not cheapened, but becomes even more vital.
Recently with the advancement of technology, photography, a trade previously performed mostly by professionals, is being taken over by the rest of the population. Nowadays everyone can become a photographer with just the push of a button. This is what we call the concept of citizen journalism. Nonprofessionals can simply be at the right place at the right time and capture a moment on film and sell it to the media. They can then call themselves “photographers.” However, not everyone is devoted to citizen journalism. Others collaborate with participant photography to tell the powerful stories of those who are a part of a less fortunate community.
Participant photography allows children living in poor economic conditions to be just as fortunate as a privileged child. PP allows these kids to tell the stories of their lives through film so that they can have a voice. In addition, PP enables these kids to help surface the different social issues and problems they face to the public through the pictures they take. Their voices can finally be heard.
Projects such as Shooting Back allow such participant photography to occur. Shooting Back is a program that gives cameras to homeless children to document their struggles in everyday life. When Shooting Back was invented it was one of the first known attempts to allow homeless children to call attention to the collective problems they face in our society. These children’s pictures were exhibited through all different types of media publicizing the despair in their lives and encouraging people to acknowledge the suffering these children have to face in society.
I think from this article one can learn how powerful an image can truly be. Whoever said, “a picture is worth a thousand words” was right. With just one snap shot comes the chance for a child to tell the story of his or her life and the harsh reality they live in. Through photography these kids can have a voice and an impact on others to help society realize the complex problems these kids face on a daily basis.
The article discusses youth as the predominant “voice” for citizen journalism. Everyone has a perspective, so you cannot really place value solely on youth journalists. Why not give a camera to a middle-aged person or an elderly person (on their way out, so to speak). We should be ‘viewing’ the world from all ages. What a young photographer might capture may have meaning to them, but to no one else (same with an older photographer). We place stress on what we, individually find pertinent, relevant, worthy. In relation to participant photography, I agree that everyone has a right to tell “his or her story.” It is unfair that those who have access are the “chosen” ones – we get to see their photos, and only their photos. Similar to the age argument, everyone has their own outlook, and by limiting one’s ability to tell their story, only hurts us as a whole. A subjective perspective is no perspective.
Also, I have noticed that some of the “best” photography depicts life that is depressing, or “gritty.” Why do photos always have to show destruction, poverty, and misfortune? Is it because it makes for a more dramatic landscape? I know that there are “happy” pictures, but I find it interesting that the most “effective” photography arises from the depiction of the distraught. Does a picture of a dying old man have more value than the birth of a child? Does a picture of a devastating natural disaster have more value than a picture of an isolated beach? Who decides what has more value? I believe it is the critics, not the consumer. As consumers, we are fed what is “good,” high brow, art.
I understand that the objective of the photography mentioned in this article is to forward social change, or at the very least, raise issues concerning social change – “bring to light” an issue that has yet to be seen, shocking, startling its viewers. However, at its root, isn’t photography just another form of visual pleasure, of entertainment? I would like to know the difference between a photo, a book, and a film. They all have the potential to be effective forms of sharing information – of being persuasive mediums to “argue” a point. Basically, why are we not giving the underprivileged a film camera or a pen and paper to document their lives?
- Nick Eliafan COMM 451
As this article suggests, new media has revolutionized our interaction with images. The means to produce and distribute photographs have become easily accessible to the average person, and thus we are flooded with billions of amateur photographs rather than a selection of memorable, careful compositions shot by professional photojournalists. Everywhere in the world, citizens and tourists have their camera-phones out, documenting their lives and news-worthy events that they come across first-hand. While we as an audience benefit from such instances of “citizen journalism” since, as Hubbard’s article mentions, professionals can’t always be present when news happens, I agree that this new phenomenon threatens the careers of photojournalists and saturates media with lesser quality, point-and-shoot images.
This is an issue I’ve studied before, and discussed with professionals at international news agencies and media corporations, so I found the article’s treatment of citizen journalism very interesting, particularly when distinguishing it from “participant photography” programs. While citizen journalism poses a threat to professionals and the quality of their craft, I believe that PP complements the job of a photojournalist, bringing new insight to their field that cannot be captured by a professional. As Hubbard explains, PP addresses the “digital divide”, giving people access to cameras who may not even have access to electricity, clean water, shelter, etc. Therefore the subject of professional work then becomes the photographer of his or her own reality – a concept that I find extremely compelling. I would love to explore such projects as Hubbard’s “Shooting Back” in greater depth, and if I wasn’t graduating from USC this May I would consider adding the developing minor!
Furthermore, I just want to offer a final insight. The oldest form of information exchange, oral storytelling, is free to all, regardless of economic circumstances; however, as we progress in the digital age, dominant communication channels such as the Internet, are not. Participant Photography programs restore this freedom of storytelling, providing less fortunate kids with the means to communicate with the world about the reality of their lives. While this is not food, shelter, and employment as critics argue, it is an undeniable freedom invaluable to a child’s development.
COMM451
Michelle Plantan
The information age we are living in has created a paradoxical phenomenon in terms of individualism. Modern modes of communication and the advanced technology of the internet have made our world more inter-connected than ever before, resulting in a sort of fluid, convergent culture. However, out of this culture convergence has arisen a serious need for self-expression. It is ironic that the technology that inspired this new struggle for individualism is exactly that which has made its existence possible. The need to have one’s voice heard is evidenced in the rapid expansion of blogs, facebooks, twitter accounts, an absurd number of cable channels and special interests programming, YouTube, and a variety of other means. It is clear that people desperately want to share their view of the world with those around them, so it is only natural that citizen photojournalism has caught on over the years an answer to just that – a way to literally show others one sees the world.
This practice, however, has created tension within the professional photography community, which questions the value of the products of citizen photographers. Even though the number of people with cameras in their hands may be on the rise, I do not feel this reduces the artistic element of photography. It merely brings up the point that this art is not limited to a select few. Hubbard brings up the question of “what happens when the experience of the photojournalist, his or her understanding of journalistic storytelling, and the quality of the image is diminished,” (3). Does the “quality” of the image necessarily decrease in relationship to the educational background in the matter that went into it? Therefore, I believe the crux of the debate over the merit or importance of citizen photojournalism actually lies in a dispute over the definition of “quality.”
Although many fear this phenomenon diminishes the art of photography, one cannot deny the benefit of the programs and opportunities it has inspired. Programs provided by institutions such as IPE give those who may not have had much of a voice the opportunity to be heard. Not only that, but “asking the general public to submit images or video increases the potential pool of compelling stories,” thus opening our eyes to experiences and issues we may never have been made aware of (2).
They say a picture is worth a thousand words…since Twitter only gives us 140 characters, I think the world of visual communication will only continue to expand into the future.
Everyone is a photographer makes several very interesting observations about not only the status of photography and photographers in today’s world, but also about the power of the image, and its ability to incite emotion, debate, tell and reveal stories, and ultimately even create social change. On the surface, I didn’t even realize there was such a drawn distinction between participant photography and citizen photojournalism. I was, however, aware of the stark controversy both types of citizen photography conjure. I find the criticism that Zana Briski and Ross Kauffman received for “Born into Brothels” fascinating; and as a journalist I am well aware of the criticism of the media that comes from major news networks soliciting photos and videos from citizens instead of paying professional photographers for their work.
While I can understand the criticisms of both new styles of documentary and photojournalistic expression, I cannot come to believe that either are “bad.” Resistance comes with every new leap of technology, but rather that whining about how new access to technology limits the employment of old-school and long-time professionals, I prefer to celebrate the ability for more people to have their voices and stories told. Leveling the playing field and allowing all persons to have a voice, rather than relying on a hierarchical structure of the past, is truly empowering. Not to mention, being able to see images of those places known best by the individuals living in them is fascinating and even mind-blowing in its scope. There is so much need in this world, I think it is crucial that we recognize that need, and formulate acts to provide aid in the form of food, shelter, access to clean water, and medical care. Yet I also believe that programs such as Venice Arts and Kids with Cameras illuminate those needs from an insider perspective, while also providing joy and expression to the participant photographers themselves – another basic human need. Any program that can accomplish that is an important one in my eyes.
As far as citizen photojournalism goes, I am interested in seeing how that debate will play out. There will always be an insatiable need for photos and stories, and I don’t see increased access to them as a bad thing. There will also always be a need for GOOD photography and professional-quality photos. I think everyone in the journalism and media world is struggling with how to turn a profit and make a living out of new technology, and while it is a somewhat scary and uncertain market at the moment, I am hopeful that something new will be born to satisfy everyone’s need to contribute to cultural photography and iconography, while also allowing creative individuals to make a living.