Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Idiot Takes Photos Of Man On Subway Tracks  
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3267 times:

Haven't seen this discussed, apologies if search has missed it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...d-New-York-train-Times-Square.html

I am disgusted. It appears there was nobody attempting to help this guy up of the track after some guy pushed him down there, and as a train arrives to mow him down, instead of helping one jerk decides to start taking pictures. I mean, seriously??

Surely this idiot could be charged with something. Or, is there more to it?

[Edited 2012-12-05 06:40:13]


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
66 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineus330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3873 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3262 times:

More to it--this article interviews several pulitzer prize winning photographers, and all generally say the same thing:
it wasn't the photographer's fault, it was the newspaper's fault for putting it on the front page. By going on the tracks to rescue someone else, you potentially put yourself in danger.
http://gawker.com/5965659/would-you-...tzer+winning-photographers-respond


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3249 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 1):
By going on the tracks to rescue someone else, you potentially put yourself in danger.

If that's the best anyone can come up with to defend someone who didn't try to help, then it's pathetic. The guy, if you look at the picture, had an arm on the platform - no clambering onto the tracks necessary in order to try pulling him up. Jeez, imagine if nobody anywhere took the slightest risk to help anyone anyway?? Pretty darn sad.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3214 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 1):
More to it--this article interviews several pulitzer prize winning photographers, and all generally say the same thing:
it wasn't the photographer's fault, it was the newspaper's fault for putting it on the front page.

Well, not quite. They say "we don't know the circumstances, it could be that the photographer was just too far away to be able to help". Which is what the photographer's excuse was, and while I find it a bit sketchy, I've got nothing to prove otherwise, so one has to take it at face value.

But yes, putting it on the front page of the newspaper was incredibly classless, and someone should lose their job for it.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2):
Quoting us330 (Reply 1):
By going on the tracks to rescue someone else, you potentially put yourself in danger.

If that's the best anyone can come up with to defend someone who didn't try to help, then it's pathetic.

That kind of logic happens all the time in rescue operations. If the risk to the rescuers is too high, they won't go.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinexjramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2462 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3198 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
That kind of logic happens all the time in rescue operations. If the risk to the rescuers is too high, they won't go.

+1

Especially if the guy who just pushed him down there was still hanging around on the platform, I would be next if I tried to help the man up.



Look ma' no hands!
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10109 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3188 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
Well, not quite. They say "we don't know the circumstances, it could be that the photographer was just too far away to be able to help". Which is what the photographer's excuse was, and while I find it a bit sketchy, I've got nothing to prove otherwise, so one has to take it at face value.

      

Exactly. No point in jumping to conclusions without knowing all the circumstances, which we probably won't.

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
That kind of logic happens all the time in rescue operations. If the risk to the rescuers is too high, they won't go.

       again.

I just had (more) explosives safety training for work. Basically, if we have a fire in the ordnance department, the fire department probably won't go in there until the fire extinguishes itself (obviously, assuming it's not about to blow up the whole neighborhood). And us employees are definitely not supposed to try and be heroes.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3183 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
That kind of logic happens all the time in rescue operations. If the risk to the rescuers is too high, they won't go.

-Mir
Quoting xjramper (Reply 4):
+1

Especially if the guy who just pushed him down there was still hanging around on the platform, I would be next if I tried to help the man up.

To a degree, of course risk is assessed. But it is rarely the case that there in literally no risk. Fine, if the guy was hanging around threatening others that would be an issue, but nowhere can I find such a suggestion. So fine, it may be speculation to an extent, but IF he wasn't around by then, and the guy had an arm on the platform to grab as appears to be the case, why wouldn't you help rather than start snapping away?

Also, even if you couldn't help, pretty reprehensible to be taking pictures like this and selling them.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Azerbaijan, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 14080 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3172 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 1):
By going on the tracks to rescue someone else, you potentially put yourself in danger.
http://gawker.com/5965659/would-you-...spond

They don´t have an emergency brake / stop signal switch accessible in the stations?
In Berlin ALL stations have emergency stop signal handles, which will cause a stop signal to appear in the tunnel before the station and cause the train to carry out an emergency braking maneuver.
http://whiteyberlin.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/026-notbremse.jpg
Also there are short circuit devices on each train and in each station, which can be used to shut down power to the third rail, but they require training.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cc/Berliner-U-Bahn-Kurzschliesser-und-Strompruefkasten.jpg/800px-Berliner-U-Bahn-Kurzschliesser-und-Strompruefkasten.jpg
(the box on the left is a warning device for track workers to show them if the third rail is live).

Jan

[Edited 2012-12-05 08:38:37]

User currently offlinedl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3145 times:

Reports indicate the guy was hanging there for 15 seconds. That's an eternity in that situation and someone should have at least attempted to help pull the guy out. If you're 40 feet from it taking photos you're three seconds away from pulling then 5 seconds away from getting him out of danger.

Taking photos instead of helping is a trend and people are being taught that aid will come from some official source, and that taking matters into their own hands is a risk and liability. Recently a cop was assaulted in front of twenty bystanders....he was struggling for his life while people took video, no one even called 911. Two or three people could have gone to the cops aid and reduced the danger, but people are being taught to not fend for themselves or help others....they're being taught to let some authority figure do it.

It's a damned shame, and it's a foreshadowing of how we're going to be approaching problems from now and that's a long slide downwards since everyone expects to be rescued and no one feels that it's their individual
responsibility.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Azerbaijan, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 14080 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3127 times:

Quoting dl021 (Reply 8):
Taking photos instead of helping is a trend and people are being taught that aid will come from some official source, and that taking matters into their own hands is a risk and liability. Recently a cop was assaulted in front of twenty bystanders....he was struggling for his life while people took video, no one even called 911. Two or three people could have gone to the cops aid and reduced the danger, but people are being taught to not fend for themselves or help others....they're being taught to let some authority figure do it.

Exactly. My first reaction would be to pull the emergency handle to stop a possible train and then to get the person off the tracks safely.

Jan


User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3119 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 6):
Fine, if the guy was hanging around threatening others that would be an issue, but nowhere can I find such a suggestion. So fine, it may be speculation to an extent, but IF he wasn't around by then, and the guy had an arm on the platform to grab as appears to be the case, why wouldn't you help rather than start snapping away?

Let's say you grab the man's arms and try to pull him out. He's heavy, though, and you can't do it. The train comes and hits the man, dragging him under, and since he doesn't let go of your arms, you get pulled down onto the tracks as well.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10109 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3071 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 11):
Yes, and let's say you go into the subway one day and get attacked by a herd of marauding homicidal giraffes - better stay out of the subway, I guess.

Did you have a reasonable belief that you would be attacked by a herd of marauding homicidal giraffes in the subway?

It's the same reason that it can be very dangerous to try and save a drowning person; you have a huge risk of being drowned by said person.

I'm not saying people shouldn't try and help; but it's not always cut-and-dry. And we all weren't there.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3052 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 9):
My first reaction would be to pull the emergency handle to stop a possible train and then to get the person off the tracks safely.

Except there is no emergency handle in NYC subway stations. The only emergency brake handles or cords that I'm aware of are on the trains themselves.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently onlineKaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12256 posts, RR: 35
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3025 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 12):
It's the same reason that it can be very dangerous to try and save a drowning person; you have a huge risk of being drowned by said person.

I'm not saying people shouldn't try and help; but it's not always cut-and-dry. And we all weren't there.

This. No further comment needed. Although it would have been better to do nothing than to take a picture just to get a front page photo and nice payday.



“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
User currently offlineeaa3 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1021 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3017 times:

I was riding the NY subway a couple of weeks ago and noticed an ad from the transport authority saying that about 50 people are hit by trains every year for various reasons.

I think they should build a gate system similar to the one on the Jubilee line in London. It might be costly but saving 50 people a year is worth it.



User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3017 times:

Well the nice way to say it is this: declaring someone an idiot is jumping to conclusions.

Do you know how long a NYC subway station platform is? Any idea how close the photographer was to the victim? Any idea how close the train was? Any idea what it would take to get a large adult primate out of a 5 foot deep hole quickly? If you don't know all those things, you've jumped to conclusions.

If you want to criticize the Post for their sensationalization of the photo, that's fair game. But don't call the photographer an idiot when you don't have any information.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2976 times:

I agree the story sounds shady but you weren't there. It's just as back as the Monday morning quarterbacking police and pilots have to endure from random people on the internet.

Now if you were only criticizing him for taking a photo in the first place, I could see where you are coming from, it's kinda strange (even though a lot of people tend to do stuff like that.)

But to not be there, only get a little bit of information, then blast him for not saving the guy?



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2976 times:

Well, we do know that he took pictures of a guy who was about to die after being shoved onto the track, then proceeded to sell said photos to a newspaper who gruesomely sensationalised this awful misfortune. That is fair qualification in itself is feel, all other speculation aside.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2964 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 18):
Well, we do know that he took pictures of a guy who was about to die after being shoved onto the track, then proceeded to sell said photos to a newspaper

He was working for that newspaper at the time.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2960 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 18):
Well, we do know that he took pictures of a guy who was about to die

Dude. For all you know, he thought he was taking a photo of someone about to be a hero.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 18):
then proceeded to sell said photos to a newspaper

Do you actually know how the newspaper got the photo? If he was freelancing for them, they owned the rights to any and all photos that he took, regardless of whether he took this particular one.

This is how photographers make money. Don't begrudge him that.


As I said earlier, it is fair criticism to levy on the newspaper. But you didn't call the newspaper an idiot. You called the photographer an idiot.

[Edited 2012-12-05 11:35:06]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineALTF4 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1214 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2914 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 20):

  

Also, the man killed may have been intoxicated at the time, according to some reports. I'm sure most people on the platform didn't know if the drunk guy was the agressor or not, or if the bum was. I'd be hard-pressed to try to rescue an aggressor out of a dangerous situation, simply for fear of my own well-being.

Call me evil. I don't care.

Point is, we don't know what happened exactly. It is heartbreaking that a man died like that, but it could have been worse had somebody tried to rescue him.

What the newspaper did was tasteless - but they're in the business of making money by generating views. Ignore the newspapers if you don't like it.



The above post is my opinion. Don't like it? Don't read it.
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3682 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2879 times:

If I was standing there, I would assume the man could have gotten himself up. Furthermore, there is room on those tracks for a person to hide between the platform and the wheels.

What isn't clear about the pictures is the speed of the train. Without being there, I couldn't spread blame for anything here, except the guy who pushed him.


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2860 times:

Well, I guess we're not going to agree here, but I still find it highly distasteful, job or not.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4838 posts, RR: 26
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2856 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This is one of those situations where NO ONE knows exactly how they will react in a situation like that. You can say what you would do in that situation, but whether or not you actually do it when faced with something like that can only be determined after you have been there.

Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Well the nice way to say it is this: declaring someone an idiot is jumping to conclusions.

Do you know how long a NYC subway station platform is? Any idea how close the photographer was to the victim? Any idea how close the train was? Any idea what it would take to get a large adult primate out of a 5 foot deep hole quickly? If you don't know all those things, you've jumped to conclusions.

If you want to criticize the Post for their sensationalization of the photo, that's fair game. But don't call the photographer an idiot when you don't have any information.

   Well said.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12640 posts, RR: 46
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2848 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 15):
I think they should build a gate system similar to the one on the Jubilee line in London. It might be costly but saving 50 people a year is worth it.

Only a few stations on one line in London have that system.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10109 posts, RR: 26
Reply 25, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2853 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 23):
Well, I guess we're not going to agree here, but I still find it highly distasteful, job or not.

That's fine, but it doesn't mean you have to think the guy was an idiot.

Plenty of people do/say things that are distasteful to me. If I don't want to see it, I simply ignore it.

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 24):
This is one of those situations where NO ONE knows exactly how they will react in a situation like that. You can say what you would do in that situation, but whether or not you actually do it when faced with something like that can only be determined after you have been there.

  



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13141 posts, RR: 15
Reply 26, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2840 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 26):
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 24):This is one of those situations where NO ONE knows exactly how they will react in a situation like that. You can say what you would do in that situation, but whether or not you actually do it when faced with something like that can only be determined after you have been there.

There might have been enough time to try to get the guy out before a train came in, but who knows. Many may freeze with such an event occurs and cannot help. Others will fear getting dragged off the platform or maybe the attacker could have as shoved any attempted saver onto the tracks with the other guy.

I am quite sure the train operator was traumatized and on medical leave, many who have that horrible experience have difficult in returning to their positions. I wish that was covered more.

As to the NY Post publishing this photo, don't forget this rag is owned by Rupert Murdoch and has a well established sensationalist tabloid style, but this was too far. Perhaps a few major advertisers will pull ads, a few less will buy a copy, the rest of the media bashing them and a few fired editors will mean they think twice of ever doing this again.


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 27, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2834 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
Well, not quite. They say "we don't know the circumstances, it could be that the photographer was just too far away to be able to help". Which is what the photographer's excuse was, and while I find it a bit sketchy, I've got nothing to prove otherwise, so one has to take it at face value.

I'll agree with that his excuse was sketchy. I saw the interview he did on the Today show this morning. He made a valid point that right after the man was pushed on the tracks the man that did it was walking toward him so he didn't immediately react to move toward the man struggling.

But, then he went on to argue he didn't "sell" the photo, he "licensed" it, which sounded like something I'd expect a paparazzi to say.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 6):
Also, even if you couldn't help, pretty reprehensible to be taking pictures like this and selling them.

To be far to the photographer, he mentioned that after the man was hit and the train had stopped dozens of people were there shooting photos/video of the rescue effort. I'm sure many of those people saw the event happen.

Quoting dl021 (Reply 8):
Reports indicate the guy was hanging there for 15 seconds. That's an eternity in that situation and someone should have at least attempted to help pull the guy out

The photographer said that something between 45-60 seconds went by from the time he was thrown on the tracks to the time he was hit. During that time around (according to him) 100-150 people didn't move to save him. That is deplorable. Even if 1 crazy man is in the subway station, you would hope that 2-4 people out of 100-150 would step forward to overpower the assailant or save the man struggling for his life. But, if I was there with my family and the assailant was still around, I'll admit I would have protected them first.

Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Do you know how long a NYC subway station platform is? Any idea how close the photographer was to the victim?

According to him 150 feet.

Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Any idea how close the train was?

According to him 45-60 seconds went by before the train hit him.

It's been a while since I've been in the NYC subway. At that stop are the opposite direction tracks separated by a wall? The Downtown stops I remember weren't. Could the man on the tracks have jumped over to the other direction subway tracks? All accounts were that he may have been intoxicated though.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 28, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2786 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 28):
It's been a while since I've been in the NYC subway. At that stop are the opposite direction tracks separated by a wall? The Downtown stops I remember weren't. Could the man on the tracks have jumped over to the other direction subway tracks?

No, that's a station with two side platforms and four tracks (one on each platform and then two in the middle for express trains). There are just columns that separate each of the tracks, so he could have tried to go over to the express track, but that would have meant jumping over two third rails and going away from the apparent safety of the platform. So I can understand why he wouldn't have tried to do that in the heat of the moment.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinejfk69 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2781 times:

As none of us were there none of us can really judge. We all think that we would be the hero and push the crazy man out of the way while hauling the man off the tracks and then doing 3 back flips just to show off. 99 out of 100 people will sadly freeze and not know what to do. This crazed man ( who has since been caught) hung around for most the time the victim was on the tracks. The victim was also drunk and in a dazed state for most the time on the tracks. We do not know how long he was trying to get up and if you have taken the NYC subway before (which I do most days) the trains enter the station very fast.

NY is full of wackos that most of us try to steer clear and ignore, so to not see people running over is not a shock and I fault no one including the photographer. His first reaction was to reach for his camera because that is his job. If emergency personnel was on the platform then they would have helped as that is their job.

In regards to the NY Post I see it both ways. I am a post subscriber and get the paper delivered every morning. I know what it is and I know I am not reading the NY times. As disturbed as I was to see the picture on the post I am also ok with it because once again... It is the post and by them running it on the front page it has people allmover the world referencing the paper which is what the want. My problem is with all the war that is filmed by the news stations why is no one up in arms about that? Why is no one up in arms at the news stations showing the NY Post cover and spending a fair amount of time talking about it... Get pissed a them as well for continuing the story and not letting it die.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 30, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2757 times:

Quoting jfk69 (Reply 30):
His first reaction was to reach for his camera because that is his job.

This is one of the most important points on the thread. The OP is angry at the photographer for doing what a photographer does: photograph newsworthy events.

What I don't understand is the recalcitrance about it -- now that it is clear that the photographer is neither an idiot nor malicious, and very likely could not have even done anything to help in the first place, why one digs in his heels continuing to malign the man is beyond me.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 28):
Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Do you know how long a NYC subway station platform is? Any idea how close the photographer was to the victim?

According to him 150 feet.

An eyewitness in a stressful situation usually cannot be trusted to correctly measure time and distance. Wikipedia says the platform is between 500 and 600 feet. (!)

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 28):
Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Any idea how close the train was?

According to him 45-60 seconds went by before the train hit him.

Again, an eyewitness in a stressful situation usually cannot be trusted to correctly measure time and distance. We've probably all been there in those moments where as adrenaline kicks in, the brain starts working on overdrive to deal with a stressful situation. This is the phenomenon of "time standing still."

More information about the subway stations in New York: the platform is at least 4 feet deep.
http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/img/cars/sheet-r143.jpg
(Note that the height from the top of the rail to the floor of the train is 3' 10" and a rail is another 4" on top of that.)


There's not a chance in hell I'd jump down from a subway platform to save someone who fell. Then there would be two victims. But hey, if someone thinks he can jump down 4 feet, help lift an adult male human over a 4 foot wall, and then climb this 4 foot wall to safety himself, all within 30 seconds as a train bears down on him, good luck. But I'd think most people would admit that he probably can't.

[Edited 2012-12-05 18:04:16]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2747 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
declaring someone an idiot is jumping to conclusions

No it is not. The photographer is an idiot. In fact, the photographer is a heartless, unsensible, massive imbecile.

Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Do you know how long a NYC subway station platform is? Any idea how close the photographer was to the victim? Any idea how close the train was? Any idea what it would take to get a large adult primate out of a 5 foot deep hole quickly? If you don't know all those things, you've jumped to conclusions.

I am sorry, but none of those questions need to be answered for RussianJet to accuse the man of being an idiot. The only question that needs to be answered is the one of whether or not the picture was taken. Clearly, it was taken and taken by the idiot. A man who looks at another man who is about to die and has the lack of sensible discernment, of heart, and of compassion for the other man and his family, and who decides to take a picture of the moment is an idiot, an imbecile. In fact, he is the kind of person that we do not need in society. Regarding the questions that you pose. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that the photographer was 1 kilometre away from the man on the track, that the train was 1 metre away from the man on the track, and that it would be physically impossible to remove the man from the tracks. Even at these extreme assumptions, I cannot accept that any decent person would take a second to think about taking a picture. Running towards the man on the track, calling 911, shouting about what was happening; all of these actions, useless as they may have been, would have been a decent thing to do in that situation. Thinking about taking a picture and actually taking a picture is a sick, vile, and heartless thing to do in that situation. Standing silent and still would have been more noble than taking that picture. As for publishing the picture, I feel it best if I don't even speak about that. Thus, stating that the photographer is an idiot is itself a great understatement. The photographer is a much, much worse human being than the average idiot.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 32, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2733 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 31):
This is one of the most important points on the thread. The OP is angry at the photographer for doing what a photographer does: photograph newsworthy events.

What I don't understand is the recalcitrance about it -- now that it is clear that the photographer is neither an idiot nor malicious, and very likely could not have even done anything to help in the first place, why one digs in his heels continuing to malign the man is beyond me.

I will confess certainly that I could without doubt have worded the thread title better - but then, if it stirred a debate of opposing opinions then it wasn't entirely without purpose.

Nonetheless, though it may be his job to take pictures, I simply can't accept that it's ok to snap away at someone in that situation. He doesn't appear to have great justification other than 'well it's my job' - and perhaps I can accept that instinct was a factor stemming from that, but I still don't like it. Like I say though, I doubt we'll find a great deal of common ground on this one.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 33, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2725 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 32):
No it is not. The photographer is an idiot.

Well, damn! If you say so, he must be.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 32):
I am sorry, but none of those questions need to be answered for RussianJet to accuse the man of being an idiot. The only question that needs to be answered is the one of whether or not the picture was taken.

So... taking a photo of a disaster makes you an idiot?

I guess the guy that videoed the Hindenburg, AA179, and the planes crashing into the WTC were all idiots. Never mind that all three of those videos helped us figure out what happened.

And as I said earlier (though I doubt you saw it), for all you know, this photographer thought he was about to capture a photo of someone becoming a hero.

Here's what you need to understand clearly: the man that took the photo is a photojournalist. Photojournalists do not take photos because they are nice to look at. They take photos to document what happens, particularly in newsworthy events, which surely even you can agree this was. This man did his job.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 32):
Running towards the man on the track, calling 911, shouting about what was happening; all of these actions, useless as they may have been, would have been a decent thing to do in that situation.

What report did you read that said that none of those things happened?

I think you've come into this conversation half-cocked.

[Edited 2012-12-05 18:32:24]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3657 posts, RR: 5
Reply 34, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2727 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 32):
A man who looks at another man who is about to die and has the lack of sensible discernment, of heart, and of compassion for the other man and his family, and who decides to take a picture of the moment is an idiot, an imbecile.
Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 32):

So that is the opinion you have of journalists and photographers who cover war zones, disaster-hit areas or any other place/situation where people die before their eyes or suffer because of what has happened to them?


User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2712 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
I guess the guy that videoed the Hindenburg, AA179, and the planes crashing into the WTC were all idiots.

D L X, sincerely, do you genuinely believe that any of those three events are comparable to what is being discussed here? Do you believe that the connection this photographer developed whilst looking at a person about to die from a couple of feet away is as personal as the connection that was developed between whoever photographed/videoed those three events and those inside the aircraft, for example? I cannot conceive how you can possibly compare this with ANY of those three events on the terms that you are arguing for.

Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
for all you know, this photographer thought he was about to capture a photo of someone becoming a hero.

Yes, of course that's what he believed to be photographing.

Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
Here's what you need to understand clearly: the man that took the photo is a photojournalist. Photojournalists do not take photos because they are nice to look at. They take photos to document what happens, particularly in newsworthy events, which surely even you can agree this was. This man did his job.

I have absolutely no need to understand any of those points. If the man's job involves doing something as heartless as taking a picture of another man about to die, then you need someone with human qualities lower than those of an average idiot to do that job.

Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
What report did you read that said that none of those things happened?

No report at all. And, again, no report is needed. We know the picture was taken and all that I am arguing is that the time he allotted to take the photograph would have been better spent doing any of those three things or standing silent and still.

Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
You're in the same lot as the OP. You've jumped to conclusions.

A bit hypocritical to accuse others of jumping to conclusions without knowing in full what took place when you are defending the photographer based on his professionalism without also knowing in full what took place.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2691 times:

Quoting lewis (Reply 35):
So that is the opinion you have of journalists and photographers who cover war zones, disaster-hit areas or any other place/situation where people die before their eyes or suffer because of what has happened to them?

No, Lewis, it is not. I can tell you that it is not the kind of thing that I would do or like to do, but I will not tell you that my opinion regarding "journalists and photographers who cover war zones, disaster-hit areas" is the same as my opinion of this particular photographer. The explanation is simple and it is that I cannot see how standing a few feet from a man about to be run over by a train is comparable to the examples you give.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 37, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2686 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
all that I am arguing is that the time he allotted to take the photograph would have been better spent doing any of those three things or standing silent and still.

It's very difficult to argue that him just standing there and doing nothing would be better than trying to document what happened. At least he made himself somewhat useful rather than just standing there and doing nothing. Whether he could have made himself more useful, that's hard to say.

If you want to be pissed at someone, be pissed at the editors who put the photo in the paper (and on the front page at that). Just because the picture was taken doesn't mean it needed to be shared with the whole world.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2841 posts, RR: 12
Reply 38, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2672 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 38):
It's very difficult to argue that him just standing there and doing nothing would be better than trying to document what happened. At least he made himself somewhat useful rather than just standing there and doing nothing. Whether he could have made himself more useful, that's hard to say.

If you want to be pissed at someone, be pissed at the editors who put the photo in the paper (and on the front page at that). Just because the picture was taken doesn't mean it needed to be shared with the whole world.

I think there's a lot of blame to go around. Because the photographer took the photo he's getting the brunt of it, but there were many other people there that could have attempted to lend a hand to the guy on the tracks. I don't think anyone is advocating that someone should have jumped down and tried to save him, but a couple men could have pulled a small Asian man to safety. And there were many other men around.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3657 posts, RR: 5
Reply 39, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2671 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 37):
The explanation is simple and it is that I cannot see how standing a few feet from a man about to be run over by a train is comparable to the examples you give.

Ok here is another one, not from a distance.



So what is the difference here? Is it because it is NYC vs Baghdad, Kabul, Saigon or any other far away place where photographers capture someone getting killed or already dead? Do you consider the photographer of the above being disrespectful of this man's life, family, kids? Or is it OK because he is a Pulitzer prize-winning and famous photojournalist?


User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2619 times:

Quoting lewis (Reply 40):

Lewis, however different those two men and their motivations and stories may have been from those in this train story, and however impacting that photograph may be, my point remains unchanged. Photos like the one you post should not exist. The motivation to take photographs of such intensity such as the one you posted is something that I cannot understand. I cannot understand why people find themselves enthralled looking at them and I cannot understand how photographers justify taking such photographs to be exhibited to hundreds of thousands of viewers. Spreading stories and making an impact across the world can be done without having to propagate horror and evil laden moments. If you don't know his story, look up the story of Kevin Carter as it is, unfortunately, somewhat relevant to what we are discussing.

Quoting Mir (Reply 38):
If you want to be pissed at someone, be pissed at the editors who put the photo in the paper (and on the front page at that). Just because the picture was taken doesn't mean it needed to be shared with the whole world.

Mir, that is the great problem. A photographer who takes such a photograph is making a conscious decision to accept that that photograph is going to be exposed with great likelihood. The only way the photograph is not going to be exposed is if the author pretended that it was never taken, which he did not do. That decision is what troubles me the most.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10109 posts, RR: 26
Reply 41, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2607 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 32):
Even at these extreme assumptions, I cannot accept that any decent person would take a second to think about taking a picture.

Well then consider that he might not have thought about it. Instinct can be a strange thing, and your brain tends not to work too well when faced with extremely stressful situations.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
for all you know, this photographer thought he was about to capture a photo of someone becoming a hero.

Yes, of course that's what he believed to be photographing.

It's as valid an assumption as any that you've made.

Look, ultimately, what Mir said is perfectly valid. NO ONE knows what they're going to do in that situation until you're in it. Even then, you may not know what you're about to do.

That's why there are police/emergency/fire/military/etc. who are trained to deal with emergency situations.

To be honest, if you can't accept that any decent person might do that or something like it, I think you may be surprised at how many indecent people there are in the world.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3657 posts, RR: 5
Reply 42, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2607 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 41):

Lewis, however different those two men and their motivations and stories may have been from those in this train story, and however impacting that photograph may be, my point remains unchanged. Photos like the one you post should not exist. The motivation to take photographs of such intensity such as the one you posted is something that I cannot understand. I cannot understand why people find themselves enthralled looking at them and I cannot understand how photographers justify taking such photographs to be exhibited to hundreds of thousands of viewers. Spreading stories and making an impact across the world can be done without having to propagate horror and evil laden moments. If you don't know his story, look up the story of Kevin Carter as it is, unfortunately, somewhat relevant to what we are discussing.

Don't get me wrong, I could NEVER do something like that, I just do not have the stomach for it. And, since I do know who Kevin Carter is (I am a fan of photojournalism), I think that he didn't have the stomach for what he saw and photographed either. But, in the end, a section of photojournalism does work with such "subjects" if you may call it that and I would not go as far as saying "they should not exist". Would you say the same thing about a book that you personally find vulgar or distasteful? I hope not.

Photojournalism is about showing the world what is happening, no matter how strong the emotions that it may cause are. Such photos are meant to provoke and even disturb. The impact that these photos make across the world cannot be surpassed by text or just storytelling. After all, a picture is worth a thousand words. Things like the scene portrayed above happen around the world on a daily basis and won't stop happening just because a person does not document it in the form of a photograph. Without such pictures, people just do not pay attention, even if they are fully aware that it is happening. Such pictures create the biggest impact of them all in terms of showing the world what happened. Yeah, the man dying in the subway station may not have been an event worthy of being accompanied by a gruesome photo but morally speaking, it is not different at all.

I guess in the end it is a matter of personal taste, and at least you are consistent in your view. Most of the people that went against the photographer in the train story would find nothing wrong with the picture I posted above, they would find it bold but they would never tell the photographer that he/she should be "ashamed of themselves" for taking it.


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6363 posts, RR: 32
Reply 43, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2596 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 41):
The motivation to take photographs of such intensity such as the one you posted is something that I cannot understand. I cannot understand why people find themselves enthralled looking at them and I cannot understand how photographers justify taking such photographs to be exhibited to hundreds of thousands of viewers.

The above is perfectly valid because you are talking about you and about what you don´t understand. But this:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 41):
Photos like the one you post should not exist.

That is much bigger and what you are doing is advocating censorship. I don´t agree with the photograph or with the publishing of it, but I am not going to go and decide for other people what they can photograph, or tell tabloids what they can publish or not. Nor will I like it if anybody comes and tells me that I am not right in my mind for wishing certain photographs be taken.


User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2566 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 42):
I think you may be surprised at how many indecent people there are in the world

I grew up in the middle of one of the greatest, longest, and most destructive civil wars in modern history. I have a pretty good idea of what indecency is and have witnessed a fair share of moments and sights that I am thankful few people have had to be exposed to. Maybe it is because of having witnessed and heard of things that I might have been better off without hearing or seeing that I loathe the nature of these photographs so much.

Quoting lewis (Reply 43):

Lewis, I will not and cannot contest anything that you wrote there. I understand the nature of the job and I understand how pictures tell stories and make an impact better than a million words. But, as you say, some pictures, the very horror laden ones, demand "stomach" to take and I just happen to believe that having the stomach to take such pictures tells something about the photographer. That is all that I am trying to express. In the end, and as you say, it is all a matter of taste and opinion, and I hope the family of the man in front of the train can cope with the existence of that picture as best as they can.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
That is much bigger and what you are doing is advocating censorship

You do seem to an expert at flinging heavy concepts such as racism and censorship on the table. Wishing a given picture did not exist is not equal (unequal, in other words) to advocating censorship. To advocate censorship I would have written something like "photojournalism should be banned" or "taking pictures like this one should be prohibited", which I did not.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
Nor will I like it if anybody comes and tells me that I am not right in my mind for wishing certain photographs be taken

Which should be no impediment for anyone to tell you that all day long.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 45, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2563 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
D L X, sincerely, do you genuinely believe that any of those three events are comparable to what is being discussed here?

ABSOLUTELY! You just do not want to accept that because it does not align with your desired conclusion. The only way they are different are in the magnitude. But that doesn't mean that tigers and tabbies aren't both cats.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
Do you believe that the connection this photographer developed whilst looking at a person about to die from a couple of feet away is as personal as the connection that was developed between whoever photographed/videoed those three events and those inside the aircraft, for example?

Respectfully, I have no idea what this sentence means.

If you mean to say that the subway photographer was a few feet away, then your exaggeration is not worthy of reply. If you mean that the photographer had a personal connection with the deceased, please be serious. This was Times Square Station, New York City, during the afternoon. There were probably a thousand people between the photographer and the victim.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
I cannot conceive how you can possibly compare this with ANY of those three events on the terms that you are arguing for.

They're all photos and videos taken of events where the subjects were about to die, just like this event.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
I have absolutely no need to understand any of those points.

Actually, yes you do. If you want to comment intelligently on photojournalism, you should know what it is. It is not to make pretty pictures, or even photos that are pleasant. It is a photojournalist's job to record events, even if they are disturbing.

I thought at first that your problem with this guy is that he didn't help. Now I'm thinking it's that you think tragedy should simply not be photographed. I think you will find yourself in the minority, and you will certainly lose the support for classifying the photojournalist that captures tragedy as an idiot.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
Quoting D L X (Reply 34):
What report did you read that said that none of those things happened?

No report at all. And, again, no report is needed.

Sir, you accused someone of doing nothing to help when you don't know jack about what happened. Unless you were a witness (in which case I'd ask what YOU did to help), yes, you in fact do need a report before you accuse someone of doing nothing.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
That is much bigger and what you are doing is advocating censorship.

  

Quoting lewis (Reply 43):
Such photos are meant to provoke and even disturb.

I'll go one better:

silencing such photos do no service to the public. The world is provocative and disturbing at times, and it gets no less so by whitewashing it and hiding what happened from the public.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 39):
a couple men could have pulled a small Asian man to safety.

So, now he's a "small Asian man?"

The amount of assuming on this thread is truly something.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 36):
A bit hypocritical to accuse others of jumping to conclusions without knowing in full what took place when you are defending the photographer based on his professionalism without also knowing in full what took place.

No. I've never assumed anything. For all I know the photographer is actually an evil, depraved man. But there is exactly zero evidence of that, and I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that he is.

[Edited 2012-12-05 21:51:43]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3657 posts, RR: 5
Reply 46, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2553 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 44):

But, as you say, some pictures, the very horror laden ones, demand "stomach" to take and I just happen to believe that having the stomach to take such pictures tells something about the photographer.

I don't think it says something negative about the photographer. It is just another job that needs to be done by someone. I also think that I could never work in a morgue for obvious reasons. I do know one person that does and he has no problem with opening up human bodies on a daily basis. He is just a normal person, I don't judge his "insensitivity" to what he sees day in day out.

Quoting D L X (Reply 45):
Quoting lewis (Reply 43):
Such photos are meant to provoke and even disturb.

I'll go one better:

silencing such photos do no service to the public. The world is provocative and disturbing at times, and it gets no less so by whitewashing it and hiding what happened from the public.

Agreed, for me the disturbing part is that all those things have happened and will keep happening around the world and not the fact that there is photographic proof to go along.


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6363 posts, RR: 32
Reply 47, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2546 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 44):
You do seem to an expert at flinging heavy concepts such as racism and censorship on the table.

I call it the way I see it. If it bothers you, you are free to ignore my posts.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 44):
Which should be no impediment for anyone to tell you that all day long.

You can tell me whatever you want all day long. But the following quotes show that

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 31):
In fact, he is the kind of person that we do not need in society.
Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 31):
As for publishing the picture, I feel it best if I don't even speak about that.
Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 31):
The photographer is a much, much worse human being than the average idiot.

your opinion on the matter is essentially that certain things should not be available to the public. And I do not need to be an "expert" as you say, to call that "heavy concept" censorship.


User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2543 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 45):
you accused someone of doing nothing to help when you don't know jack about what happened

I made no such accusation. I only accused the photographer of allotting time to take a photograph rather than trying to help further or trying to help at all.

Quoting D L X (Reply 45):
I thought at first that your problem with this guy is that he didn't help

You don't need to think. You only need to read what I am writing in very plain and clear terms.

Quoting D L X (Reply 45):
I've never assumed anything. For all I know the photographer is actually an evil, depraved man. But there is exactly zero evidence of that, and I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that he is.

Yes, you have. You have assumed the man to be a professional and to act on his professional requirements and you have assumed that:

Quoting D L X (Reply 30):
it is clear that the photographer is neither an idiot nor malicious
Quoting D L X (Reply 45):
Respectfully, I have no idea what this sentence means.

Then I'll do us both a favour and stop here with this little discussion. If you can't understand something so simple as the *screaming* difference between filming any of the three events you mention and looking at a man's face when he is about to be run over by a train, and if you can't understand how much more personal it is, then we have nil values in common and any further writing would be a waste of keyboard.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1893 posts, RR: 2
Reply 49, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2468 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Dude. For all you know, he thought he was taking a photo of someone about to be a hero.


You cant be serious right?

Quoting D L X (Reply 30):
This is one of the most important points on the thread. The OP is angry at the photographer for doing what a photographer does: photograph newsworthy events.
Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 31):
I am sorry, but none of those questions need to be answered for RussianJet to accuse the man of being an idiot. The only question that needs to be answered is the one of whether or not the picture was taken. Clearly, it was taken and taken by the idiot. A man who looks at another man who is about to die and has the lack of sensible discernment, of heart, and of compassion for the other man and his family, and who decides to take a picture of the moment is an idiot, an imbecile. In fact, he is the kind of person that we do not need in society. Regarding the questions that you pose. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that the photographer was 1 kilometre away from the man on the track, that the train was 1 metre away from the man on the track, and that it would be physically impossible to remove the man from the tracks. Even at these extreme assumptions, I cannot accept that any decent person would take a second to think about taking a picture. Running towards the man on the track, calling 911, shouting about what was happening; all of these actions, useless as they may have been, would have been a decent thing to do in that situation. Thinking about taking a picture and actually taking a picture is a sick, vile, and heartless thing to do in that situation. Standing silent and still would have been more noble than taking that picture. As for publishing the picture, I feel it best if I don't even speak about that. Thus, stating that the photographer is an idiot is itself a great understatement. The photographer is a much, much worse human being than the average idiot.


I stood up and applauded after reading this. It needs to be reposted everywhere this debate is going on.

Bottom line this man took a breathing amazing awe-inspiring photo while trading in all of his common decency and humanity to do it. This to me is a perfect example of people putting everything in front of being decent human beings to each other.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5715 posts, RR: 44
Reply 50, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2446 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A lot of people here are saying that the photographer acted as any PJ would.. the old "f8 and be there!!" mantra.

The photographer himself is saying otherwise.. or making excuses after the fact!

Firing the flash to warn the driver, excuse me if I giggle about that!!. Can't speak for the NYC subway but whilst Sydney has overhead power, there are enough flashes and sparks for most drivers to be pretty insensitive to them(granted the PJ may not be concious of that) and with every second person taking snaps of their freinds every couple of minutes, a few bright flashes might not have achieved much.
The images I have seen... perhaps not fine art.. do look deliberately composed.

Then the clincher.. he conciously decided to supply them to the Post which ran them on the front page.. TWICE

Sorry Mr Abassi, you and your editors at the Post are scum... not sure that the many who watched on.. then took photos and videos after the fact are any better.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinepellegrine From France, joined Mar 2007, 2468 posts, RR: 8
Reply 51, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2417 times:

Actually, I think anyone who blames the photographer is shameful and needs to get a grip.

The only one who deserves blame is the murderer who pushed the victim in front of the train.

Documenting real life isn't morally absent, it just is what is.

In America too often we don't see photos of DEATH and victims of MURDER. Sorry to say. Americans are far too insulated. So it is shocking when we see such things in graphic detail. I'm frankly tired of Americans who are afraid of publicizing death. S*** happens in a very bad way, every day on this earth. It SHOULD be documented by photojournalists and print journalists. Historically, that is how we knew the savages of things like war and other societal detritus. People just need to get a grip of the negative parts of reality. They should be documented and presented for others to see.

Truthfully, the murderer was arrested and charged. There is no one else to blame here.

As fast as those subway trains move coming into a station...I don't care if you're 10 feet away. If you're not Superman you might not even have the strength to pull that man back on the platform within the few seconds you have to act.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7714 posts, RR: 21
Reply 52, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2395 times:

Sorry. Have not blamed the photographer instead of the murderer in any way. Have merely deplored the photographer's actions which were separate. No use presenting it as either or, that's a total red herring. Being appalled at the photos oddly enough does not preclude apportioning blame to the guy who pushed the victim.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5715 posts, RR: 44
Reply 53, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2388 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting pellegrine (Reply 51):
Documenting real life isn't morally absent, it just is what is

Perhaps that is around the wrong way,

..being morally absent, is just what is... and we are all the poorer for it.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinejfk69 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 54, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2361 times:

I am just curious to know where the outrage was back in August when the NY times ran a photo of the Empire State Building shooting bleeding out on the sidewalk>?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...e-building-shooting_n_1828786.html

Why does the NY Post offend but not the Times?

Quoting stealthz (Reply 50):
Then the clincher.. he conciously decided to supply them to the Post which ran them on the front page.. TWICE

He works for the post and is not a freelancer.

UNLESS ANY OF US WERE ON THE PLATFORM WE CAN NOT JUDGE WHAT EVERYONE CHOSE TO DO IN THIS SITUATION INCLUDING THE PHOTOGRAPHER!!!

To this day the image of the planes hitting the towers haunts the hell out of me but NO ONE chastises every single news outlet in the world for running it. Daniel Pearl sitting with a sword to his throat....again, no one jumps on the media. This is how we report news nowadays. Lets be honest, unless we are reporting about children this is how the media is.


User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 55, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2352 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 49):
Bottom line this man took a breathing amazing awe-inspiring photo while trading in all of his common decency and humanity to do it.

So you're absolutely certain that he had enough time to go over and help the man?

Quoting stealthz (Reply 50):
Can't speak for the NYC subway but whilst Sydney has overhead power, there are enough flashes and sparks for most drivers to be pretty insensitive to them

Nn the NYC subway there's third rail power, and photography of trains or tracks is actually banned in the system. Not that the ban is heavily enforced, but people taking photos of an approaching train are rare enough that it would probably catch a driver's attention.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinepellegrine From France, joined Mar 2007, 2468 posts, RR: 8
Reply 56, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2340 times:

I feel bad for the victim, the victim's family, and the person who was in command of that train. Imagine. Horrifying.

I was in midtown a few weeks ago shopping on Madison. I didn't take the subway but maybe three times, but damn. It's so loud and fast comparatively to what I'm used to.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 57, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2336 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 48):
Quoting D L X (Reply 45):
you accused someone of doing nothing to help when you don't know jack about what happened

I made no such accusation.

You made the accusation in your very first post to this thread, noting all the things that a decent person would have done, then declaring the photographer indecent.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 48):
You only need to read what I am writing in very plain and clear terms.

Sir, maybe there's a language issue here, and I mean no disrespect, but your writing is far from clear.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 48):
Yes, you have. You have assumed the man to be a professional and to act on his professional requirements

I have not _assumed_ he is a professional, I know that he is a professional. He is a freelance photographer that does work for major news outlets. That is public knowledge.

You are (repeatedly) making the mistake that a lack of assumption means assumption of the opposite.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 48):
and you have assumed that:

Quoting D L X (Reply 30):
it is clear that the photographer is neither an idiot nor malicious

Wrong. I made a conclusion based on a reasoned, dispassionate argument. Leave the emotion out of it, and that's the conclusion a reasonable person will reach.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 48):
Then I'll do us both a favour and stop here with this little discussion.

This comment is childish and does nothing to elevate the conversation.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 48):
If you can't understand something so simple as the *screaming* difference between filming any of the three events you mention and looking at a man's face when he is about to be run over by a train, and if you can't understand how much more personal it is, then we have nil values in common and any further writing would be a waste of keyboard.

Now it's my turn.

If you can't articulate the difference between the NY Post photo and the three instances I mentioned (or the two that Lewis has mentioned) without escalating your emotion, then maybe the difference is only your emotion. Flailing around, raising your voice, and declaring that a difference is obvious does not make it so.

NOW. Can you calmly, without emotion, identify the differences between the five photos that Lewis and I have mentioned and the NYC subway photo?

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 49):
Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Dude. For all you know, he thought he was taking a photo of someone about to be a hero.


You cant be serious right?

"You can't be serious" is not a substitute for a reasoned argument.

Are you _assuming_ that this man had prurient goals?

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 49):
Bottom line this man took a breathing amazing awe-inspiring photo while trading in all of his common decency and humanity to do it.

Then we'll put to you the question that has been asked of some others on this thread: do you believe that it is simply indecent to photograph a tragic scene?

Quoting jfk69 (Reply 54):
I am just curious to know where the outrage was back in August when the NY times ran a photo of the Empire State Building shooting bleeding out on the sidewalk>?

1) That photo DID spark controversy, as noted in the headline of the article you cited.
2) That photo did not include the horrible, sensationalist caption that the NY Post photo did.

[Edited 2012-12-06 07:02:08]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 58, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2305 times:

What I'm sensing on this thread is a lot of transferred disapproval from the NY Post to the photographer. The NY Post definitely glorifies the photo to appeal to the churlish, almost as if to encourage the viewers to take delight in the morbid and satisfy their lust for death.

I think if the photograph had the title "Why Wouldn't Anyone Help This Sweet Man?!" not a soul here would be criticizing the photojournalist.

Indeed, that is the power of a caption.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2267 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 55):
So you're absolutely certain that he had enough time to go over and help the man?

Mir, again, no one here that shares my view is arguing on the basis of whether or not he had time to save the man. The *only* fact that matters is that he took a portion of the total time he was there to take that photograph. Allotting time to take a photograph in a situation like that *is not* a decent thing to do. What cements his absolute indecency and lack of character is that he did not get rid of the photo when he saw what he had captured. He made two conscious decisions that render him an indecent imbecile.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently offlinejfk69 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 60, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2269 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 57):
1) That photo DID spark controversy, as noted in the headline of the article you cited.
2) That photo did not include the horrible, sensationalist caption that the NY Post photo did.

1) Hardly the same controversy that this pic is creating
2) The famous photos that were posted before did not have wacky Post headlines either....pictures are very very strong without words as well.

Still pro photographer.


User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 61, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 59):
The *only* fact that matters is that he took a portion of the total time he was there to take that photograph.

So you believe he would have been more useful just standing there in solemn silence rather than document what happened? We'll have to agree to disagree.

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 59):
What cements his absolute indecency and lack of character is that he did not get rid of the photo when he saw what he had captured.

He's a photojournalist. It's his job to take photos of dramatic situations and to keep them for posterity. Never mind his employer, I can't imagine the police would have been very happy with him if he had destroyed something that might have helped them in their investigation.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineStarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 62, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2241 times:

I have not been to New York City since I was very young so I do not know how things operate in their subway system.

My question is that in most subways that I have been on there are police/security or some type of officials walking around on the platforms. Are there any of these types of people on the platforms in NY that could have been informed that someone had fallen off the platform that had a radio or something who could have stopped the train until they lifted the person from the tracks?


User currently offlineSpeedbird741 From Portugal, joined Aug 2008, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2233 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
So you believe he would have been more useful just standing there in solemn silence rather than document what happened?

No, I don't. I believe it would have been more decent of him to do nothing than to take the time to capture the moment. Even if we leave out his intentions or motivations for taking the photograph, doing nothing would have been more human and decent of him.

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
He's a photojournalist. It's his job to take photos of dramatic situations and to keep them for posterity

I understand that it is his job, but that makes this action no more decent and no less questionable.

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
I can't imagine the police would have been very happy with him if he had destroyed something that might have helped them in their investigation.

You are right, I admit. Regardless of whether or not he knew how video surveillance in that station was like, deleting the photo immediately might not have been the more appropriate thing to do, I admit. Notice, taking the photo was still wrong in my opinion. I am merely saying that *conditional* on the photograph having been taken, deleting it immediately might not have been the appropriate thing to do. However, submitting the photo to the police is integrally different relative to submitting it to his employer, and so the point still stands.

Speedbird741



Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21699 posts, RR: 55
Reply 64, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2220 times:

Quoting Speedbird741 (Reply 63):
I believe it would have been more decent of him to do nothing than to take the time to capture the moment. Even if we leave out his intentions or motivations for taking the photograph, doing nothing would have been more human and decent of him.

In other words, it would be more decent of him to be useless. Again, we'll have to agree to disagree.

And again, this is all predicated on the assumption that he could not have reached the man in time to help - that's what he said, I have no evidence to prove otherwise, so I have to take him at his word. If he could have reached the man in time but chose to get a photo instead, that's a whole other kettle of fish.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11434 posts, RR: 52
Reply 65, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2215 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
He's a photojournalist. It's his job to take photos of dramatic situations and to keep them for posterity.

  

But some people refuse to accept that.

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
Never mind his employer, I can't imagine the police would have been very happy with him if he had destroyed something that might have helped them in their investigation.

Let's add one more group of people who will be glad this photo was taken: the victim's family. It will be exhibit A in the criminal case against the person alleged to have pushed the victim onto the tracks.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6732 posts, RR: 12
Reply 66, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2154 times:

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 14):
I think they should build a gate system similar to the one on the Jubilee line in London. It might be costly but saving 50 people a year is worth it.
Quoting scbriml (Reply 24):
Only a few stations on one line in London have that system.

Why only a few stations, is it under installation ?

3 full lines are equipped in Paris, including the two most busy lines (the 1 that many tourists use since it deserves the Champs Elysées, the 13 and the 14). Lines 1 and 14 are fully automatic lines so it is mandatory.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Man Arrested For Suspicion Of Rape On Myspace posted Thu Jun 8 2006 03:11:36 by Jetjack74
New Photos Of North Korea's "Hotel Of Doom" posted Fri Sep 28 2012 12:42:04 by txjim
Number Of Locomotives On Certain Trains? posted Sun Jul 15 2012 19:49:53 by 747400sp
Star Of David On Iran Air HQ posted Tue Nov 30 2010 14:02:26 by jfk69
Cunard Takes Delivery Of New Queen Elizabeth posted Fri Oct 1 2010 03:18:44 by MadameConcorde
Some Photos Of Klyuchevskaya Volcano posted Wed Sep 22 2010 01:13:09 by Severnaya
Nasa Announces Discovery Of Water On Moon posted Thu Sep 24 2009 15:18:10 by Ojas
Inside Account Of U.S. Eavesdropping On Americans posted Thu Oct 9 2008 11:54:21 by Mortyman
Stripper Allegedly Rapes Best Man On Bucks Night posted Tue Sep 9 2008 15:37:18 by Tsaord
Why No Man-on-man Chic? posted Sun Aug 24 2008 01:10:18 by Braybuddy