Introduction
A South African Photojournalist Kevin Carter, wrote an article “The Vulture and The Little Girl” which had an intriguing photo of a little girl and a vulture. The article sheds light on the world about major South Sudan drought and how the world would offer aid. He was later rewarded and won the Pulitzer Prize in 1994 (Soloski, 1989). Even though this story was an eye-opener both in journalism and humanitarian, it brought up various conflicts between the media and the receptors. However, the citizens took a different perspective on the photograph. They came up with other theories to explain why the photograph did not show any sign of compassion. When the photo was published, many people followed up with the New York Times about whether the child survived the Vulture and got to the camp. Journalists have both societal and ethical judgement of morality which they choose in different situations.
Ethics
On many occasions, journalists are faced with many ethical dilemmas in the field. It was a tough choice for Carter, between taking the photo to show the world the extent and impact of the drought in South Sudan and the critics from people for not grabbing the child and taking her away from the Vulture’s claws. The photograph was to show the world that some areas survive without fundamental human rights, for example, the Right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being (Voakes, 1997). However, public opinion on this showed the expectations about human suffering and condemning the violation or the absence of human rights (Voakes, 1997). Therefore, Carter’s photograph is valid because he was exposing the absence of human rights in it. It shows how the government had neglected the parts of Sudan affected by the drought. In other words, society measured the failure to help individuals in distress against the need to raise awareness about the human suffering situation.
In this case, for a photojournalist to act ethically, they would have to present reality as it was. It means representing the photo without manipulation. This would give the world the absolute truth of the situation. If the world believes that the photograph corresponds to reality, appropriate action is taken by the parties responsible (Weaver, 2019). Carter represented the image as it was, with no active manipulation. It showed how the drought had affected the area till the child was in danger of being fed by the Vulture. It was right by the code of ethics. However, there are claims that Carter waited for the Vulture to move closer to the child in the frame. Public opinion perceived this as a lack of humanity since the first human action would be to take the child to safety. The aesthetic representation of the photo became a violation of Human Rights.
Objective and Professionalism
It is fair that Carter perceived this as an opportunity to draw the world’s attention to help the people there. The photograph was enough to make people overwhelmed by empathy and sympathy. From then, donations of food, money and other effects started streaming in from different parts of the world. This showed that the photograph encouraged humanitarian intervention. However, many understood that Carter was carrying out his “professional duty” of photojournalism. The award was due to his proper representation of the article. This fueled more critics from the humanitarians. The public suggested that he should have been human before he became a photographer. His lack of humanity and the Pulitzer Awards aroused ethical debate on photojournalism (Soloski, 1989). The public claimed that he was rewarded for putting the child at risk to take a photo while he was in a capacity to help her.
Apart from ethical debates, the photograph brought up conversations about the role of photojournalism in future. Phillip Jones Griffiths, a photojournalist from London, raised a concern about whether exploitation is the central role of journalists in the industry (Bergman, 2022). Refereeing Carter’s situation, he seemed to have exploited the characters in the photograph. He waited in the scene for around 20 minutes, hoping that the bird would move close to the child so that he could get a clear photo of them. He waited for an eye-grabbing shot for the public. The main question on the internet is whether the exploitive material is for the right intent (Weaver et al., 2019). Many thought Carter was after the Pulitzer awards or social media ‘likes’. However, he had connected to his subject and was fighting on her behalf- with pictures (Luong, 2021). Therefore, people might say that it was not exploitative.
The work of concerned photographers is to raise public awareness of an issue with the intent of bringing change that follows humanity’s great protocol and social documentary photography. It is up to the journalists to provide the truth and facts to the public to interpret it for themselves. Even though this is the main objective, many industry journalists stray away from their own objectives (Shin, 2021). Regardless, Carter took a photograph as it was and availed it for the public to take the necessary action towards it. Even though people suggested that he had other objectives, that photo proved to be for the more significant course.
The study of ethics guides journalists in making thoughtful moral choices under many journalistic behaviors and cognitions, which could not be readily observable when making the decisions. This might have influenced Carter to take a photograph instead of grabbing the child. There are social influences that overlap the ethical issues of a journalist (Loung, 2021). For instance, Carter writes that, after he was done taking the photo, the child still had the strength to get to the United Nations feeding center. However, media responsibilities are time applicable to ethical principles, but not only to journalistic cases. When it involves human interactions, moral choices have to be made.
The question of professionalism is conflicted between the two extreme arguments of both the media and the public. Carter maintained his professionalism by photographing and showing it to the world. He won the Pulitzer award because he performed the most basic duty of a journalist, which is to inform (Sahin, 2021). His photograph depicted famine in Sudan, which from his perspective, informed the people about the parts of the world which was affected. However, maintaining his professionalism would have meant him helping the girl to where she was going. Therefore, depicting morals and humanity and making ethical decisions should correspond.
Roles and Positions of Journalists in the Media Profession
Journalists play different roles in their line of profession and their positions in news organizations. The media professions work within economic constraints. Economic constraints help in the major decision-making processes. It helps journalists focus on financially achievable programs. Their role is to commercialize the programs to achieve maximum revenue. It enables them to plan programs that are more beneficial to the public and profitable to the media house. It is the work of media practitioners to work and respond to political constraints (Waykar & Shetty, 2022). There are many strategies that the media houses use to avoid conflicts with the regularities. Compliance helps to avoid conflicts with the government and politicians. The media is the middleman between the public and the government (Waykar & Shetty, 2022). For instance, Carter used journalism to inform people about the government’s neglect of the areas suffering famine (Sahin, 2021). The information from journalists is reliable which serves as a basic influence to the media receptors.
There are communication regularities set by the government for the media profession. The media uses the preemption strategy to ensure they follow the government regulations; however, it also ignores them, with consequences of breaking communication regularities which is punishable (Reese, 2019). Economic and political constraints are the two main factors affecting the roles of journalists in the media profession. The media personnel make decisions, designs active strategies, and pursues them within economic and political constraints.
Conclusion
Journalists can shape public perceptions while also bearing the obligation of telling the truth and ensuring that people’s voices are heard. Their power is primarily indirect: they cannot compel people to do or not do something. They can, however, set the agenda and act as gatekeepers, deciding which issues are brought to the forefront and which remain hidden. As a result, media outlets and journalists play an important role in establishing which narratives become dominant in their society. Unfortunately, in the case of advancement issues, sensitive issues such as migration, drought, and famine frequently play a negative role.
References
Bergman, T. (2022). Manufacturing foreign news from afar: Views from an editor’s desk. Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies.
Luong, N. H. V. (2021). Harnessing social media use in journalism: Management and journalists’ perceptions of social media, professionalism and managers’ roles.
Reese, S. D. (2019). Hierarchy of influences. The international Encyclopedia of journalism studies, pp. 1–5.
Şahin, S. (2021). Journalism in conflict-affected societies: Professional roles and influences in Cyprus. Media, War & Conflict, 1750635220987746.
Shin, D. (2021). Why does explainability matter in news analytic systems? Proposing explainable analytic journalism. Journalism Studies, 22(8), 1047–1065.
Soloski, J. (1989). News reporting and professionalism: Some constraints on the reporting of the news. Media, Culture & Society, 11(2), 207–228.
Ricketson, M. (2021). Literary Journalism and Global Media Ethics. In Handbook of Global Media Ethics (pp. 743–761). Springer, Cham.
Voakes, P. S. (1997). Social influences on journalists’ decision-making in ethical situations. Journal of mass media ethics, 12(1), 18–35.
Waykar, K., & Shetty, L. (2022). Social Media Photography: A challenge to photojournalism.
Weaver, D. H., Willnat, L., & Wilhoit, G. C. (2019). The American journalist in the digital age: Another look at US news people. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96(1), 101–130.