Focus on the added value, the difficulties and the respect of the people photographed.
Almost since the appearance of photography, this medium has been used to provide media coverage of various events, generally unfortunate, such as wars or conflicts and social movements. It is then up to photographers to question the merits of their work, its relevance and its added value.
Since 1853 and the first Crimean War photography has played a central role in media coverage of social conflicts. This technology (photography) was only about fifteen years old and the cameras were still bulky and heavy. Capturing an image then required a long exposure time, often several seconds. Since then, we have seen many photographs circulating of the conflicts and their ravages.
The use of images in media coverage has become normal. The questioning of the process is rare, even non-existent. We are however entitled to question ourselves on the relevance of photography: what does it gain for you to admire images of military mass graves, to look at photographs of the front, of wounded or dead soldiers, of missile strikes or even images at the drone of destroyed cities?
Lauren Walsh, teacher at The New School and New York University, and Director of the Gallatin School’s Photojournalism Lab, thus found herself, unwittingly, faced with this question. While leading a class on conflict photography and ethics, a student told her: “I don’t see why I should care about that person.” And he continues: “There’s nothing I can do anyway. So why should I be made to feel bad?”
But this question supposes a reaction to the visualization of the image: some action that would have quick and measurable consequences. If this is not the usefulness of photography (causing a reaction in favor of the victims of wars and global warming), then where is it?
Photography as a universal language
As the French photoreporter Louis Witter said in an interview filmed for the Farouest magazine, photography “is a universal language”, understandable for everyone, whatever your native language or the languages you master.
Photography thus eliminates all language barriers to which textual – and sometimes filmed – information is subject.
“Photography is a universal language. What we write in photography, we can read it in France, in China, in Japan without filter, without translation”
Sebastiao Salgado
The message can therefore be transmitted by limiting questions of understanding and translation. This disappearance of the barrier is, however, not always exact or complete: in fact, a photograph often relies on a caption to clarify the language and ensure a good understanding of what the image shows.
In addition, the legend allows you to add context: link, date, protagonist, the action or event shown…
“Photography is a universal language. What we write in photography, we can read it in France, in China, in Japan without filter, without translation” explained Sebastiao Salgado, a Franco-Brazilian photojournalist known worldwide.
Photography brings another phenomenon: that of an overview, and an almost instantaneous understanding, in a single glance. Looking at the image once, quickly, is often enough to grasp the general message, the subject. Conversely, a long text is sometimes necessary to have all the information: you must then take the time to read it and decipher it.
When reading an article on any subject, comprehension depends on the choice of words. Even if both people speak the same language, the words chosen by the journalist will guide the understanding of the message.
In a language as rich as French, for example, the choice of a word can completely modify the meaning of a sentence. And this choice is not without consequences: it is, very often, the reflection of a political opinion expressed but not assumed.
Emotions and reactions
For William Daniels, a French photographer working on long-term documentary projects, with a particular interest in people’s quest for identity and territories subject to chronic instability, the use of photography is largely based on a question of « sense« .
After studying science which did not interest him, he discovered the joy of telling stories and people through photography during a trip to Latin America. Photography, through the association between images and stories, allows us to tell the world and understand it. But above all, for Daniels, to share “the meaning and the emotions”.
For her part, Nanna Vedel-Hertz, a Danish journalist and photographer who mainly deals with migration issues, the emotions generated by the image make it possible to “create a connection between the person photographed and the person looking at the image”
“We can be satisfied with a text alone. But this creates a distance, often significant, with the people we are talking about. Likewise, we can do with images without text, but this can complicate understanding” she said.
In addition, Vedel-Hertz adds that the image acts on memory. We remember an image more easily than a text, especially if it has left an impression on us, from one side or another.
Similarly, when we evoke an event, an image of it is generally what comes up first. This is all the more true when the photographer adds his style, his touch. We then remember the image for the emotion it created, for what it showed, but also for the photographer who took this image.
Artistic touch
Another point Daniels emphasizes is the artistic aspect of the image. According to him, « each photographer has his own style« , which makes him recognizable compared to other professionals. This artistic aspect of the image, and therefore of the media processing of information, allows us to try other ways of processing information, to innovate.
Obviously, for Daniels, this innovation is undoubtedly possible with video to a lesser extent. “But I’m a photographer, I haven’t tried other media, and I could be wrong,” he explains.”But with photography, we have real freedom in our creative process, which is unique.”
“Certain images, which are on my site, will never appear in the media. Because they do not correspond to the usual codes of photography in information. Instead, we find them in exhibitions for example , where the information is also brought to light, but in another way »
William Daniels
Two years after the Tulip Revolution, in Kyrgyzstan, Daniels over there, documenting the post-revolution. He then wonders if Europe, and France, is not fantasizing the events. « For many, the events there were yet another victory for democracy over an authoritarian regime. In the end, the new president was even worse than the previous government, and a new revolution took place in 2010 – this one really changed things » Daniels explains.
The photographer therefore went there and produced his first long series: Faded Tulips. He explores the daily life of families in this post-revolution era who, in the end, “only want to eat”. Daniels explains that initially, the people there lived in harmony. But the creation of Kyrgyzstan, arbitrarily by an external power (Russia) without really taking into account local populations and ethnic groups, is at the origin of conflict between Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in particular.
Although Daniels went there to document the period after the first Tulip Rebellion, he tried a more artistic and, above all, more personal approach to photography. Thus, “certain images, which are on my site, will never appear in the media. Because they do not correspond to the usual codes of photography in information. Instead, we find them in exhibitions for example , where the information is also brought to light, but in another way » he concluded.
The aestheticization of a conflict or an event, through the media coverage that is provided – particularly in photos – is also found in the video. This is particularly the case for the use of aerial views and drones.
This time we can take the example of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Since the start of the war, numerous documentaries and photographic reports have been produced. Many of them are based, at least in part, on the use of this aerial view.
The ruin has also been the object of fantasy for painters for decades. Louis-François Cassas, Giovanni Paolo Panini, Caspar David Friedrich, or even Sebastiano Ricci and Bernardo Bellotto, the painters of the romantic movement of the early 18th century, made the ruin a playground and a source of inspiration. A symbol of romanticism for one, of divine anger for another, the ruin becomes a pictorial subject in its own right.
But romantic art used ruins from the Antique era, long gone and generally in this state of ruin through the simple passage of time and abandonment. In the case that interests us (Ukraine), ruin is achieved by the actions of a Head of State and by the army of his country. The passage of time has nothing to do with it and this ruin is achieved at the cost of human lives.
In view of these elements, it behooves us to ask ourselves if the aestheticization that photography brings, for such a subject, is not a lack of respect? Is it necessary? Should we settle for a “basic” photograph, which provides information without trying to embellish it?
Or, on the contrary, does the aestheticization of the image, and therefore of the media treatment of a subject, not make it possible to reach more people, to reinforce the emotion generated? And, therefore, to encourage the sharing of information – humans being more inclined to share an image that pleases them aesthetically – and therefore increase the dissemination of media coverage?
Difficulties and deontology
The question of the usefulness of photography still arises. If this has advantages over other information media (universal language, transmission of emotions, aestheticization of information processing) it also has disadvantages: the understanding of the image and the subject is sometimes only possible with the legend.
When covering a forest fire in photography, how do you indicate the location and date without the caption? However, this is essential information for understanding information.
Aestheticization can also make it more difficult to understand the message. And, in certain cases, this can invite the viewer to classify the image in the field of art images, without necessarily associating it with real information.
But to the limits of understanding the image are added the limits imposed by ethics. This is also found in journalism in a somewhat different format: respect for those interviewed, prohibition of lying or transforming comments for one’s own benefit, non-disclosure of identity when necessary or requested, ensuring the security of sources…
In photography, such unspoken rules exist. It is therefore necessary to ensure the safety of the person being photographed and respect their dignity.
In France, a law regulates the practice of photography when it conveys a message « likely to seriously undermine human dignity ». The press law, for its part, includes a provision repressing “the reproduction of the circumstances of a crime or misdemeanor, when this reproduction seriously harms the dignity of a victim and is carried out without their consent”.
Human dignity can be defined as follows: the fundamental, unconditional and identical respect due to all human beings for the fact that they are human, regardless of their differences. Human dignity includes physical respect and psychological respect for human beings, as well as respect for moral integrity.
By following this definition, it then becomes complicated to deal, photographically speaking, with a subject such as a war, a revolution or a major social movement. This dignity itself being flouted by the different parties involved, how can we reinstate it as a photographer?
For Nanna Vedel-Hertz, the Danish photographer, respect for the person being photographed is important: « the best way to show them respect is to ask. Can I take your picture? Does the photo suit you ?Is she putting you in danger? »
« This notion of dangers is also important: some people flee their country for various regions (wars, authoritarian regimes, etc.) and the simple fact of having their face in an image can represent a danger, even this far from their country of origin We must therefore make sure to limit the danger, to reduce it to nothing; and for that, the best thing is to trust them. If they tell you « this photo puts me in danger », delete it and we show them we’re doing it.”
Nanna Vedel-Hertz
You must then adapt your practice. How to show without showing? How can we show if there is nothing we can show without endangering? For Vedel-Hertz, it is a question of shifting its framing: « We photograph their backs, so as not to see the face. We frame a hand, an arm, a leg, without showing any particular sign of distinction. » Other techniques are possible: establishing focus in such a way as to leave the person in the dark, so as not to make them identifiable, for example. “And finally, there are personal effects.” Obviously, not those with an engraved and readable name on them!
A final method is to ask « if he was the one who took this photo of me, would I agree that he didn’t publish it anymore? »
Last point of ethics which questions the work of the photographer: are we the right person to carry out this report? When a “privileged” photographer (meaning Western, white and even more so for men) goes to a country at war or going through a crisis, on another continent, is he in the best position to tackle the subject?
From one country to another, from one continent to another, cultures diverge. The same goes for language, religions, beliefs, practices, lifestyle, art or sensitivity. And the further apart the regions are, the greater the gap may seem.
This difference leads to biases: shortcuts of understanding or adaptations of the story to the culture of the journalist and photographer’s country. For Daniels, there is no point in trying to repress one’s biases.
« They are there, they are part of us. Trying to put them aside does not work; it is naive and a liar to pretend otherwise » explains the photographer. « What you need is to be honest, admit that they are there, and accept to deal with it ».
For its part, Vedel-Hertz offers another solution, without denying the existence of its biases: “The simplest thing is to ask people on site, to take their advice into account. What information would they put forward?” “In any case, we must remain award of it” she concluded.
Its limitations of photography can call into question the merits of the use of this medium. For Lauren Walsh, the answer depends on each person. « If a new student made the same remark to me, « I don’t see why I should care about that person », I would not provide a precise answer. I would rather have them gather around the table to discuss it, to study the arguments for and against » concluded the professor at The New School and New York University.
Benoit Dupuis-Tordjeman : Photographie et journalisme 