I think this subject does need to be expand, not just restricted to James Oatway. After all what we really are discussing is the ethics of photojournalists.
So the two .codes of ethics are Associated Press and National Press Photographers Association
http://www.ap.org/company/News-Values
https://nppa.org/code_of_ethics
When discussing this, one of the the standards often refered to is:
While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.(NPPA)
although there is also the last standard whichg says:
When confronted with situations in which the proper action is not clear, seek the counsel of those who exhibit the highest standards of the profession. Visual journalists should continuously study their craft and the ethics that guide it. which seems to recognise the conflict between professional and moral decisions.
This supposed morale outrage could be addressed at nearly all photojournalists, yet the difference is their actions. Nick Ut took the burnt child to a hospital, as did James Oatway.
How about Just remember thef Civil War carnage by Mathew Brady, US Soldiers being dragged and beaten in Somalia by Paul Watson; the Katrina victims by Vincent Laforet?
AD Coleman said of this:
Charles Moore risked life and limb to document the Civil Rights movement and bring the viciousness of southern racism to the world’s attention; neither he nor his subjects nor those who published or viewed his work back then thought he needed to do anything more beyond that.
Paul Watson could not have “helped” the dead U.S. soldier whose corpse he photographed being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu by an angry mob.
Vincent Laforet was not in a position to “help” the people he photographed (often from the air) in the aftermath of Katrina more effectively than he did by bringing their plight before the world’s eyes.
Marcus Bleasdale wrote, “I’ve always been taught that journalists must comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. With our words and pictures, we
can trigger a reaction from the general public and from the leaders they elect”
How about the New York photojournalist who took images of the man on the tracks?
http://gawker.com/5965447/photo-of-...ront-page-of-the-new-york-post-sparks-outrage
In this case he probably does have a case to answer., in a Forbes article
(http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffber...york-posts-subway-death-photo-was-it-ethical/)
John Long of the National Press Photographers Association.ethics committee said: “I cannot judge the man,” he says. “I don’t know how far away he was. I don’t know if he could’ve done anything.”
On the question of what his duty was in the situation, he’s unequivocal. “If you have placed yourself in a situation where you can help, you are morally obligated,” he says. “The proper thing to do would’ve been to put down the camera and try to get the guy out. I can understand why people are upset.” “Your job as a human being, so to speak, outweighs your job as a photojournalist,” he adds.
I think that about sums up the difficult decisions. In Oatways case, I think he made the right decisions, when he realised how injured the man was (when he collapsed after walking away) he stepped in and took him to medical facilities.
