Page:Cori Elizabeth Dauber - YouTube War (2009).pdf/54

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

use them on a regular basis (at least every 4 years) with no apparent difficulties. If this method is considered necessary to keep viewers from misunderstanding and believing the networks are presenting material actually produced by political campaigns, should it not be considered equally appropriate and necessary to keep viewers from believing the networks are the source of material produced by those responsible for the deaths of American soldiers and marines—not to mention innocent civilians—in order to produce the footage?

Let there be no mistake, this footage is shot by terrorists and insurgents of attacks perhaps staged for the explicit purpose of providing material for filming. Imagine the outcry if it were suggested the networks rely on footage of campaign events shot by photographers on the staffs of the campaigns for their coverage. Indeed, we do not need to imagine it, for the press has never accepted the idea that even relatively innocuous photographs of fairly formulaic events could be provided by official White House photographers in place of their being granted access themselves. The President of the White House News Photographers Association (WHNPA) had this to say about instances where official White House photographers' images (called "releases," "photo releases," or "handout photos") were the only ones made available (or, indeed, were simply the shots chosen by news agencies):

If we truly want to improve coverage at the White House and maintain credibility as journalists, we must press the decision makers at our news organizations not to use handout photos and strongly encourage independent press coverage of the daily activities of the President."[1]

40

  1. All quotes are from Susan Walsh, President White House News Photographers Association, Letter to Members, www.whnpa.org/join/walshletter111605.pdf.