From The 'If It Bleeds It Leads Department' — Death Jump Photo Ran Because That's What We Do
	found on The Miami Herald written by MAYORBOB, edited by John (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Sat 13 Mar 5:44am
		The life of 19-year-old New York University student Diana Chien ended tragically on March 6th as she jumped to her death after arguing with her boyfriend. As a matter of journalistic interest, it was appropriate for the media to mention the fact that Ms. Chien was the latest in a number of student suicides at NYU this year. Indeed, she was the fourth to have killed herself by jumping off of a tall building. Her death affected the campus community deeply, spurring officials to seek answers to this dilemma. But, what has NYU authorities, the Chien family, and many people scratching their heads is the fact that The New York Post saw fit to run a photo of Ms. Chien on page one. But, not just any photo. It was a photo of her plummeting to her death.

	Student suicide is not an uncommon phenomenon these days. According to the Jed Foundation, people of college age are particularly subject to the overwhelming feelings that bring one to commit suicide. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among college-age students and the number one life-threatening danger for college women. NYU authorities are trying to come to grips with this latest suicide and develop some effective approaches to help them avoid any further tragedies. They also took the opportunity to thoroughly slam The Post over its decision to run the picture, "Given that this had already been in the paper once, it seems to show an appalling lack of judgment and insensitivity to the young woman's family and a disregard for the feelings of students at NYU." Angry readers of The Post wrote letters expressing their outrage over the publication of the photo. And what is The Post's reaction to all of this? Monumental chutzpah, to put it mildly. Barry Gross, chief copy editor at The Post addressed the issue and essentially said, "hey, sorry but we're a tabloid". Admitting that he was the guilty party who made the decision to run the photo, he said that it dressed up a "damn good story."

[ < return to the discussion ]

show almost all: 37 commentsmost: 13 commentsbest: 5 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

40.  Re: Photo Journalism Shows Us What Happened   by cloudofdust       at Tue 16 Mar 8:06pm score of 1   in reply to comment 37     I think the Diana Chien photo, like the Kent State photo, answers What, When, Where, How and drives one to the article for the Who and Why. I'm not arguing that it rises to Pulitzer status just that it does its job. We can disagree on that point just as people at the Post did. We can also disagree about whether journalism needs to be tasteful. I don't think journalism should be demure. Headless Body In Topless Bar is about as tasteles as it gets but it's also a brilliant piece of efficient storytelling and good journalism. I admit to being somewhat nonplussed by your assessment of the Kent State picture as not overwrought. There's Mary Vecchio, hysterical and in a pose of pleading and torment. Blood streams past her into the gutter. Not overwrought? In contrast the Diana Chien photo is anonymous, bloodless and dispassionate. It biggest failing is its remove. It lacks the drama and emotion of both the Kent State photo and Execution in Saigon. I think your comments about the truth those photos reveals is something that has come to be seen as time has given them perspective and context. I agree that the Diana Chien photo is more factual than truthful but not every photo rises to the level of art and icon. You spend a lot of words spinning angles where another photo would have been more appropriate. That you don't spin any angle to the story that justifies the photo's use makes me think you are a little bit squeamish. The Diana Chien photo isn't Weegee but your alternatives are pap. A photo of her dorm room or the floor of the library? Yeah, that's so much more interesting and enlightening. You ask some (possibly rhetorical) questions about Execution in Saigon. Are you aware that there is motion picture film of that event? I don't remember seeing that film at the time but I have seen it on TV several times since and it shows all the gory detail. That creates an odd situation for me since I can't look at the still without seeing what happened before and after. As far as I can tell the photo you link shows the moment of impact, look at the shooter's trigger finger. That guy is not about to be executed, he's already dead. As with the Chien photo there's enough ambiguity to allow us to disagree about what the image signifies. I don't think the difference in reporting between Vietnam and Iraq is so much a question of blood as it is of the willingness of news media to turn an unflinching eye towards the events at hand. One particular sequence I saw on the evening news (with Walter Cronkite) has stuck with me for 35 years. A reporter, photographer and two other people were driving down a road when they hit a landmine. The photographer was rolling at the time so the viewer gets to be a first person witness at the death of the four people riding in that car. It wasn't bloody footage but it was very disturbing. I doubt that any of the networks would have the guts to run that footage today and journalism is diminished because of that. I feel like I've gotten away from my original intention which was not to defend the Chien photo on its merits but rather to defend Barry Gross' decision not to look away from what's happening even though that unflinching gaze is upsetting.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

41.  Re: Photo Journalism Shows Us What Happened   by Clandestino       at Tue 16 Mar 10:53pm score of 1   in reply to comment 40     First of all, I obviously munged up names and put Diana Chien as the photographer of the Kent State photo. I admit to being somewhat nonplussed by your assessment of the Kent State picture as not overwrought. There's Mary Vecchio, hysterical and in a pose of pleading and torment. Blood streams past her into the gutter. Not overwrought? I'm saying it's relatively restrained. Compared with some of the other photos that could have been used of the same incident (I've seen some footage — I believe one where the Nat. Guard started firing), I think it holds back quite a bit. There's blood, perhaps, but there's no wounds. The photographer didn't catch Mary Vecchio acting like Mary in the Pieta. In contrast the Diana Chien photo is anonymous, bloodless and dispassionate. It biggest failing is its remove. I don't think there's just an emotional distance to the photo, but something more akin to antipathy (especially paired with the headline); suicide as spectator sport. Visually, it connotates a Wile E. Coyote cartoon. You ask some (possibly rhetorical) questions about Execution in Saigon. Are you aware that there is motion picture film of that event? I don't remember seeing that film at the time but I have seen it on TV several times since and it shows all the gory detail. I vaguely remembered seeing the film, but my web search on Execution didn't find any details on whether it was a photograph or a still from a movie, so I figured it was a still. (I think this is the second time I've put my foot in my mouth over Vietnam-era journalism. Apologies.) I'll maintain, however, that there's any number of ways the (photo) shot could have been ruined by being more lurid. A difference of a few degrees in terms of angle wouldn't have shown the expression on the guy's face, and would have shown much more clearly the entry wound — something that would've turned it from a symbol of the horrors of war to a snuff-film. Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]