That the World May Know- Question #15

#15 In the Storytelling chapter Dawes talks about this effect as it relates to journalists (both photo and print), and details the 1971 executions in Dhaka. Based on what you have learned so far in this course, did Riboud do the right thing and for the right reason?  How can we use some of the insights in this chapter to more deeply understand the responsibilities (and rights??) of those tasked with telling stories about the various humanitarian crises we have studied? What are the issues a ‘comms officer’ must address as she/he communicates to the ‘outside world’ images and stories of the affected community?

Researchers and aid workers in a country of crisis immerse themselves in the culture of an area to collect qualitative data on the people.  However, the data that observers are collecting may not accurately represent the people, as the Hawthorne effect suggests that people generally alter their behavior when they are being observed.  This is important as Dawes brings to our attention that many humanitarian workers relay their experiences as an aid worker to outsiders, becoming storytellers (Dawes 164). Almost seamlessly, the illustration of their past experiences become a story from their point of view, which may not touch on important aspects of the event, or what actually occurred.  Journalists and photographers especially become subject to storytelling as their job is to be a direct observer of a context, and capture it for others viewing. Ultimately, the job of journalists and photographers in humanitarian crises presents an ethical dilemma.

In That the World May Know, photographer, Marc Riboud is a direct observer at the time of multiple executions at the Dhaka racetrack in Bangladesh.  Rather than photograph, Ribouds instinct was to find officers to stop the violence, which he did not succeed with. Did he make the right decision, to try to find help once the violence was already occurring? Riboud said “I couldn’t photograph such a scene behind the torturer, taking no risk” (Dawes 168).  Editor, Harold Evans believes that Riboud felt that photographing this moment was “enticing the soldiers”, in other words encouraging and rewarding the soldiers to continue the violence (Dawes 168). Riboud experienced the humanitarian imperative and took action, which I believe was the right decision. This is right, because other photographers were already photographing the moment, what does another picture do? Morally, Riboud’s decision to attempt saving the lives of endangered humans could have been more powerful and effective than photographing the executions.  Riboud could have potentially saved the lives of certain individuals, which should come first before spreading passive news of the violence.

Over the duration of this course we have discussed the humanitarian imperative, beginning with the example of passing by someone who has fallen and become visibly injured. As a class we decided that anyone of us to walk by would have the urge to ask them if they needed help, because it is a human instinct (SOC 376).  However, I have begun to expand my thought on this imperative to help others in need while reading about the two photographers who continued to stand on the racetrack capturing photos of the execution. The decision of the photographers shifts my belief that not everyone has the human instinct to help the endangered, in better words that not everyone feels the humanitarian imperative.  These individual photographers felt that it was more of their duty to record the event, than their duty to help the people before them. The humanitarian imperative is definitely a unique aspect that certain people hold.

Photographers and journalists are put in the position of telling a story, through images or words, which is difficult because they witness more than they can capture.  Their job itself is an ethical controversy. Without their work, the harsher realities would go unseen, and on the other hand with their work they may be wrongfully telling the events which occured.  Riboud made a remark that “we are all better off because of people willing to take pictures”, and another photographer said that “ to walk away with evidence is the least I can do”. Both of these views affirm the fact that without images or recollections of crises, solutions may never be made, or that solutions wouldn’t be found by the white saviors.  Maybe Riboud and other photographers feel the white savior complex, and that their purpose in assisting the endangered is to bring pictures back for the global north to evaluate. However, maybe if we didn’t have the access to pictures and stories from “temporary visitors” to the global south, then the problem would be for the people to solve themselves, and our limited influence would allow for the people in crisis to develop their future from their perspective.

Photographers and journalists are not actively helping on the ground, yet they pass along news for others to do something about it. Photojournalists have the power of a gatekeeper, but who gave them that? It’s just infused in their job, as they decide what is noteworthy to capture, which aspect appears to be the most important to show or to not show.  If their photographs are telling stories, then purposefully not taking a photo would be like not telling people a part of what is occuring, which may be just what’s missing. Photography is an skill and an art, so photographers do have the right to capture what they want, they are the ones witnessing it, and they can relay their own account of the situations. This just means that the images are in the perspective of the photographer.

Nothing is out of perspective, everything that we witness, hear, or talk about is in the perspective of somebody, either our own or someone else’s. The question was raised, “What are we obliged to reveal and what to veil?” (Dawes). I think of the reference to where journalist, Matthew’s, wrote about a Marine that was killed, and through that medium the family of the Marine learnt the details of his death.  The Marines has concealed the details of the death, something done often. Should the Marines have provided the full amount of information to the family? I think transparency is best, morally so people know what has occurred especially in the instance of a death, and also for the protection of photographers and journalists so that they do not become the scapegoats when the public is outraged from being uninformed.  In the event of a humanitarian crisis, communications officers have the job of relaying information to the “outside world”. Possible exploitation of the people is definitely an issue, but it’s also important to reach people to raise awareness of such an issue. If we think of this through the utilitarian approach, we can weigh the positives and negatives of the ethical controversy, and have the chance to “maximize the good for the greatest number of people” (Bersak).  Photos and stories may be gruesome, but it does capture the attention of people willing to fight for the human rights of others.

In this world with social media, news can spread rapidly and to a large audience. Given this, there is more false news, which infiltrates chaos and confusion in people who are distant from the issue.  It would be strategic for communications officers of relief organizations to create relationships with the outside world through speaking to them often and with only the truth, this way the false news does not belittle the truth sharer. Social media also presents the ability for people in need to reach out on a global scale to recieve help (Chernobrov).  This can be beneficial to hear from a direct channel of the people in the crisis, so that their needs can be assisted, yet it can also be detrimental if there is grey space between what they say versus the communications officers reports.  Overall, transparency should be a standard in the humanitarian aid sector, between aid workers and aid receivers, and from observers to outside worlders.

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen”

DAWES, JAMES. That the World May Know: Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13x0m08.

Chernobrov, Dmitry. “Digital Volunteer Networks and Humanitarian Crisis Reporting”. May 2018. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2018.1462666

Bersak, Daniel. Ethics in Photojournalism: Past, Present, and Future. 2003 .http://web.mit.edu/drb/Public/Bersak_CMS_Thesis_FINAL.pdf