Journalism should be about reporting the truth, even if that
means shocking readers when they pick up their morning paper. When
it comes to publishing graphic photos of the fighting in Iraq, U.S.
newspapers have often erred on the side of censorship ““
especially when those photos depict dead U.S. soldiers.
The Los Angeles Times last week published a critical analysis of
war photography titled “Unseen Pictures, Untold
Stories.”
Times researchers found that not a single picture of dead U.S.
soldiers was published in the Los Angeles Times, The New York
Times, The Washington Post and two other papers from Sept. 1, 2004
to Feb. 28, 2005.
And despite intense fighting and frequent insurgent bombings,
the papers only published a total of 44 pictures of wounded
soldiers during the same time period. Hundreds of U.S. soldiers
were wounded or killed during this period, and the photos should
reflect this reality ““ but they did not.
There is no single reason for the dearth of photos of wounded
and dead servicemen. Editors and photographers interviewed by the
Times said that Iraq is a large nation, and noted how difficult it
is for photographers to be on scene to take such photos.
Reporters sometimes rush to the scene of an attack only to find
smoldering vehicles and cleanup crews ““ but few bodies.
But editors and photographers also admitted to varying degrees
of self-censorship.
One photographer, Dean Hoffmeyer, recalled standing next to a
soldier when an insurgent’s bomb detonated, killing the
soldier and 21 others. Hoffmeyer ““ though shaken ““ was
able to take photos of the dying soldier and the horrible scene
around him. But ultimately, he decided not to transmit the
heart-wrenching image of the dying soldier to his editors.
“It’s what I felt was right,” he told the
Times.
Hoffmeyer’s story is somewhat unique, because of his
personal proximity to the explosion and death.
But his story illustrates the difficult decisions that arise
when photographing dead and dying soldiers. Unfortunately, too many
editors and photographers rule against publishing graphic images of
U.S. dead, even when they do not have the personal reasons
Hoffmeyer had.
Some editors have cited concerns that readers find the photos
offensive ““ and newspapers have to sell to survive. Others
say they are concerned that their relationship with the military
could be harmed, because some view it as unpatriotic to publish
such photos.
And on the other side of the argument, no one wants to be
accused of exploiting the death of servicemen for the sake of
sensationalism. But publishing photos of dead U.S. soldiers is not
about selling more papers. Nor are such photos meant to demoralize
Americans or editorialize against the war, as some conservatives
contend.
Rather, the photos are meant to portray reality. Hundreds of
U.S. soldiers ““ men and women ““ have been killed in
Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. To report that truth is not to
dishonor their memories. Sometimes a picture is the only way to
convey what is really happening on the other side of the globe.