TZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 54 Posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1187 times:
All
One aspect of screening which is not often discussed is our responsibility to the public. We owe people a duty of care in what we put into the public domain.
We obviously wish to document the significance of an aircraft accident, however we must balance that against showing respect to the friends and families of the poor people who were involved, and may have lost their lives at the scene.
We (screeners) apply a judgement when reviewing images of accidents. Images depicting a distant, less "personal" perspective have always been acceptable and are an important record of an historically-significant event.
Images showing too much detail, looking too close into the cabin, showing the seats where people were sat, etc are not acceptable, for the reasons described above.
We recently removed an image from the database for this reason. This message is intended simply as some kind of formal notice so that we all know the ground-rules.
Tamsin
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
QANTAS077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5746 posts, RR: 49 Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1179 times:
a few years ago when the Singapore tropical megatop crashed in Taiwan there were photos for sale via this site, i found that to be in very poor taste also, i think ok, display them as they are aviation related and newsworthy but not graphic in any nature, but having them available for sale is very disrespectful.
unfortunately a few of them are still for sale, not sure why on earth people would want to sell or profit from images of death.
a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1166 times:
Kyle Matson was standing in my room showing me a picture of a crashed aircraft that he took. He told me he got many messages from the family and those close stating that it was a horrible thing and how could he take pictures, etc. Well I think the only issue with it is that the family's have to come back here and see the same picture. There will always be a new newspaper headline, a new crash, etc. to draw one's mind off the issue but here its here forever and for all to see. That's what I think gets most people over the issue. I feel no harm having a photo of an accident uploaded here nor do I have an issue seeing it as a brows through the shots here in the DB as I usually do. The for sale aspect, as Montague has pointed out, does need to be changed and should not be for profit as that is not the goal of this site, at least I hope it's not.
BA747-436 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 1259 posts, RR: 18 Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1151 times:
Quoting UA777222 (Reply 2): I feel no harm having a photo of an accident uploaded here nor do I have an issue seeing it
Not to be blunt and rude mate, but i would have thought the reason why you don’t have an issue seeing the photos of an accident uploaded is because they do no depict a scenario where a loved one of yours has perished. I would have thought you would think otherwise if this was the case.......maybe not?
I understand the standpoint Tamsin and the other crew have taken on this one, and am in total agreement.
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1140 times:
Quoting BA747-436 (Reply 3): Not to be blunt and rude mate, but i would have thought the reason why you don?t have an issue seeing the photos of an accident uploaded is because they do no depict a scenario where a loved one of yours has perished.
To clarify my statement of;
Quote: feel no harm having a photo of an accident uploaded here nor do I have an issue seeing it
I see nothing that would stop a photographer from uploading it and if I were to come across it I would not be outraged for it being on this site. Doesn't mean it'll get my click nor would I support the photographer for perusing such shots but if they get through and show no real death then there is no reason as to why a photographer should not be allowed to host such photos on this site. A crash is a crash and there is no getting around that. I do understand where you are coming from and feel that we are both voicing the same opinion but in different manners. I do not mean to offend and those were not my intentions whatsoever. I am sorry for any misunderstandings and hope I can explain myself if future issues arise with my statement.
Ghostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 354 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1106 times:
Unfortunately I have had some experience with this subject both here and also on one of my own websites. Be very aware that whatever you write in the comments field is likely, sooner or later, to be read by a relative or friend of the deceased.
One of mine on A.Net was of an HH-43 which crashed a few years after the photo was taken and the niece of the deceased pilot e-mailed me and asked me to change a couple of details. The other on my web site was a photo of the Royal Air Force 'Vintage Pair' Meteor which had crashed at Mildenhall in 1986 and the sister of a crew member thanked me for preserving the memory of her brother which I thought was very touching.
The relatively small cadre of older military photographers on A.Net are much more likely to encounter this issue than civil airliner photographers because attrition of fast military jets is still pretty common. It was a surprise to me to recently upload a photo of an ordinary F-14 on display at one of the IATs at RAF Fairford to A.Net and learn that it was the one that Lt. Kara Hultgreen tragically died in less than a year later.
N907CL From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 255 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1083 times:
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, 
From China, joined Jan 2004, 5746 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
