Paul Martin Lester’s chapter on Rights to Privacy tried to be clear on what is acceptable and unacceptable to photograph, but it seems that many cases are solved depending on the circumstances. For instance, police permission is acceptable in the case of a Florida fire, but did not relieve the photographer of guilt with the same court in a Florida drug raid case.
My ethical decisions as a photographer will most likely be different from those of others. At this point in time (and without a salary held above my head), I think I would feel invasive to photograph someone inside their home without their knowledge of my presence. A home is a private area and although I may be on public property, I am aiming my camera into an area of personal space. If those people were outside of their home and were aware that they could be seen by passerby, it would be ok to photograph them.
As for the harassment of Jackie Onassis, I am calling it just that because the photographer had no consideration for others as he proceeded to offend the woman and her children. Paparazzi have many of the same attributes, as they continuously snap pictures of celebrities doing normal things to remind the public that they are human, but do we need to be reminded of that? The paparazzi always get a reaction from the celebrities because they will not leave without one. Photographers not only have to follow the rules of the law, but also consider the emotional effect the photographs may have on others.
No comments:
Post a Comment