[Leica] How would you respond?

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

Bob Baron's reply:
Subject: Re: [Leica] How would you respond?

>>>>>>>>> "I thought you would like to know some idiot is sending out 
>>>>>>>>> libelous and
slanderous emails over your signature. You'd better alert your lawyer 
because I've alerted mine." <<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Hi Bob,
A perfectly legal response without putting your own foot in "DEEP DO-DOO!" 

My own wasn't quite so kindly! As it required the use of a "Very well made 
baseball bat and knees!"  Quietly in the dark alley behind the museum 
building!" Oh yeah at midnight!

Dr. ted  :-)

=============================================================
> From the "Most outrageous letter to a photographer from a museum ever?"
> files.
>
> Documentary photographer Chris Arnade (
> http://www.businessinsider.com/chris-arnade-photos-of-bronx-addicts-2013-12)
> found out today that one of his photographs is being included (without his
> consent) in the exhibit ??Altered Images: 150 Years of Posed and
> Manipulated Documentary Photography? at the Bronx Documentary Center. They
> let him know by sending him this email which I?m pretty sure is quite
> possibly the most outrageous unsolicited letter ever sent to an artist from
> a museum (this all Via Chris Arnade?s tumblr, arnade.tumblr.com) -- how
> would you react?
>
>
>
> Chris
>
> Apologies for the late email, we are putting together a show on short
> notice and just finalizing the lineup.
>
> On Saturday we will open up our Altered Images exhibition, which examines
> posed, faked or manipulated documentary photography. A number of people had
> suggested we include your work of substance abusers and sex workers.  We
> have reviewed your work.  You qualify on a number of levels and will be
> included.
>
> You admit to paying your subjects, which violates one of the most closely
> held tenets of documentary photography. Paying to photograph any person,
> particularly one dependent upon drugs, and even driving them to buy drugs,
> as you say you have done, is a clear breach of ethics and standards.
>
> I see that you say claim, in interviews, an exemption from journalistic
> and documentary standards by saying you are not a journalist.  Yet you
> publish your photos in the Guardian, one of the world?s most prestigious
> media outlets.  Ethical guidelines apply.
>
> A key guideline of the National Press Photographers Assn reads: ?Treat all
> subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable
> subjects.?
>
> Your photos of sex workers, some addicted to drugs, some with mental
> health issues and/or severely emotionally abused, exposing their breasts or
> bent naked over a bed, are a breach of this standard.  The fact that you
> also publish these photos on Flickr, to be gawked at by thousands, raises
> further ethical issues too numerous to address here.
>
> Briefly, people who are paid by you, under the influence of drugs or
> mentally impaired (and in many cases have little understanding of The
> Guardian or Flickr), clearly do not have the ability to give informed
> consent to their photos being used as you have done.
>
> We will include a caption under your photo outlining these ethical
> breaches.  If you so choose, you can send us up to two paragraphs in
> response and we will give it equal weight next to our caption.
>
> I?m ccing our lawyer, Don Dunn, in case you have any legal issues you
> choose to raise.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone plz excuse the typoss keyb0ard is reaLly small.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus