Elmo Louise S.

Patron

BABROUMN 2-B

CASE STUDY 1: Vulture and Little Girl by Kevin Carter

Ethics are everywhere, it is a window of character that everyone should follow,

and no one has exempted even us disciples of the media. In this time where
misinformation where rampant as before, media practitioners are subject to criticism in
all ways of spreading news and current events. Because of these speculations by many,
our ethics is critical to show our genuine desire to serve the nation nothing but the truth.
But the question is how far does our ethics go beyond our role in society in front or back
of the camera?

We can relate the essence of ethics to the trend of photojournalism. As

photojournalism approaches subjects more closely since its focus is solely on the story
pointing to tell, this field of journalism aims to tell instructive tales via a succession of
visuals whereas honesty and trustworthiness are two essential components of it. But
with claims of fake news spreading around and a lack of clarity regarding what is real
and what has been changed, today's photojournalism is in a highly perplexing state.
One best example of a photo that has been in the limelight of criticism is the photo
“Vulture and Little Girl” captured by Kevin Carter in 1993 in Sudan. This image shows a
suffering girl, obviously malnourished and being watched by a symbol of death—the
vulture. This is a powerful image; it depicts the struggle of the United Nations to provide
aid against famine. Because of this image’s message to the public, many people
questioned the intention of the photographer and alleged he of not ethically helping the
subject in the photo. This series of comments and attacks from his audience leads to
Carter taking his own life a few months later, this incident provoked the rumors that he
couldn’t live with the feeling of guilt of documenting human tragedies without being able
to solve the problems. In my opinion, having an ethical practice as a media practitioner
could have changed the outcome of this story.
 We cannot escape the fact that anyone in this world is entitled to their own
opinions, but we have the right to filter and choose opinions that matter to us the most. I
believe that Carter felt that there are so many opinions and accusations thrown at him
had led him to bad decisions. I respected him, but filtering what he wants to hear should
have saved him by his irrevocable decision because what matters most is what he has
done before, during, and after he took the photo and that’s where personal ethics will
come in. If I will be given a chance to redo what has been done to take that photo
ethically, the first thing that I will do is I will conduct personal research about the place
by knowing their current situation and what help is needed from them. Second, I will
strive to gather help that I can bring that would comfort them, by offering so they will
understand my intentions before meeting them. Knowing their situation and helping
them understand the purpose of my role as a media practitioner, would help me to be
more cautious and respectful during our encounter while protecting their identity.
Lastly, after our encounter, I will make sure that the photo that I took will help other
people to be aware of their current situation which can generate help that will benefit
them. I will be also open to anyone’s queries about my intentions about why and how I
took the photo and be transparent on my intents. If misunderstandings and discussions
may arise, I will be accountable and accept what others may say because, at the end of
the day, my intentions and conscience are clear as I do my part to explain myself.

According to one of the five core principles of journalism under Accountability, “A

sure sign of professionalism and responsible journalism is the ability to hold
ourselves accountable. When we commit errors, we must correct them and our
expressions of regret must be sincere, not cynical. We listen to the concerns of our
audience. We may not change what readers write or say but we will always
provide remedies when we are unfair.” I think being accountable to the photo could
have made a difference for Carter, explaining his attention and actions could have
saved him because it is his responsibility to be accountable for his actions. Our duty as
media practitioners does not end with publishing our works as it goes beyond that as we
ought to adhere to the same ethics as everyone else. As media practitioners, we must
make an effort that is humanly feasible to assist those who directly experience suffering.
Given the nature of our work that everyone will only see the outcome, we can use the
ethic of being accountable to erase inconsistencies in explanations that our audiences
deserve.

I conclude that this case shows the dilemma of the ethics of photojournalism. On
the other hand, Carter seeks out this dangerous situation where he documents people
that are needing of help that is impossible for a single photographer like him to solve.
But the bottom line is what is the actual solution to this conflict? Should photojournalism
cease to exist, and human suffering go undocumented? Should we all sit in our
comforting homes and turn a willfully blind eye to critical areas of the world, while we
are in a perfectly safe environment? Photojournalists are not responsible for the
suffering of the people they photograph; they are simply the messenger of life as it is
that life is not always easy. We do not need to ask about media practitioners' actions on
what help they have extended to their subject, instead, ask ourselves what we can do to
change the situation of their subjects if we feel so strongly to do so. Media practitioners
risk their lives to raise awareness and spread a message that can have a bigger impact
rather than the limited help they can offer as an individual. After all, it is our
responsibility to be accountable for ourselves but they offer us help willingly.