Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Even during the glory days of the photo essay, from the late 40's to the mid 60's, much of what you saw in publications like Life were what we might call fluff. Sure there were great journalistic achievements, but there were also lots of stories about actresses and fashion. When the business model that supported those publications went away so did that particular avenue for photojournalism. Even that ethic of "objective journalism" only existed from the 30's until fairly recently. Before that there was lots of sensational, fiercely partisan material that was used to sell newspapers. What Citizen Kane portrayed was pretty much the norm. There will always be news and great images are still important. What worked in the past won't work now, but life goes on and there are still opportunities. Mike D Phil Swango wrote: > George Lottermoser wrote: > "One of many problems alluded to in the article > revolves around those doing the editorial and essay assignments > cannot afford to do that work without adjunct corporate work > which, ultimately, compromises their journalism." > > Point taken, but all those Life Magazine photogs we so admire worked for > Time, Inc. Even Walker Evans worked for Fortune. Newspaper photogs work > for corporations too. > > As for as what the readership wants, they want celebrity news and photos. > They would *way* rather see a blurry phonecam snap of Britney's (bleep) or > Michael Jackson's surgically manufactured grimace than any Salgado essay > about ecological damage in the Amazon. Newspapering's a tough business > these days. > > >