Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Go to your World Almanac, or the Pulitzer Web site, count up all the Pulitzer's ever awarded, divide that number into the number of awards known to have been based on somehow compromised work....and then give it a rest..!! ;-) - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Paul Schiemer Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 1999 7:35 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] Re: E.Adams & Vietnam Photo Eric Welch wrote: > Second of all, doesn't this question (which is why I'm probably reacting to > it in such a manner) call into question Eddie Adams' integrity? No, I'm not questioning any integrity (read back a few pages in this exchange and you'll see). Just wondering aloud about that couple minutes of time, what was going on, what was the sequence of events, etc. > ...he won a Pulitzer. It's his picture. Period. Ninety-nine percent of the > photojournalists out there working on that level are trustworthy on such a > topic. Of course you're forgetting about some highly publicized ruses pulled on the public and the prized judges (oops, was that a typo?), where the awarded writer confessed he made the whole thing up. Or, as I remember, the staged photo of the flag raising on Iwo Jima (to end up on the cover of Life, to become the model after which a famous sculpture at Arlington is based. Didn't that win a Pulitzer too?? *There's a couple. > Or for that matter the credibility, and competence, of editors at AP and > the Pulitzer judges? Are you saying they not only measure the 'impact' of the work but gauge the veracity of the photographer/journalist? Hmmm, if that was so- they must have let a few slip through.