A journalist's responsibility

Journalists are meant to be the people that report on the world around us, without bias, with all of the facts available. A major newspaper such as the New York Post should have the ability to determine whether an article or a picture should be used. When a tragedy such happens, journalists have the obligation to report on it and newspapers have the obligation to present the information to their readers. When an incident such as the man who was pushed in front of a subway is killed occurs, there is no question about whether this should be reported. But should the photograph of the man in his last moments of life be published?

The story of the man that was pushed in front of the train definitely needed to be covered by news agencies. This was a tragic story of an innocent man that was pushed in front of a train and then killed. Even worse? The man that committed this act was not apprehended on the scene and was still roaming the streets of New York. Journalists were publishing photographs of the man that committed the act and spreading the story in order to make people aware of this event and to find the man. New Yorkers needed to know about this story. Newspapers and websites everywhere were reporting on this event. The actual reporting done is not what is questionable. What is questionable is whether the New York Post should have published the photograph of the man just moments before his death.

Photojournalists have long held the belief that they should only photograph and not interfere with the subject that they are photographing. It is not uncommon for photojournalists to feel that it is their job to only report on a story and if they interfere and help out, they are changing the story. By changing a story, there is a conflict about whether the journalist even has the right to report on a story. It has long been a challenge in photojournalism when reporters are in war zones and third world countries and are forced to only report on the terrible things they see. When natural disasters hit and people are struggling in the aftermath, a journalist may want to help but they must realize that they are helping more by simply raising awareness of the situation. As a caring human being, a reporter or journalist may want to help everyone they see, but they simply don’t have the resources to do so. They also want to present the scene they are seeing in the most unbiased way possible.  

Does this philosophy still apply to a situation such as the photojournalist who saw the train coming for the man who had been pushed? Should he have acted differently? Should he have helped the man? Should he have put his camera down? Should anyone else that was close to the man have tried to help? According to the journalist’s story, he was trying to help. Umar Abbasi says that he was not trying to take a picture of Ki Suk Han. He was only using his flash on his camera in order to get the train conductor’s attention and to try and alert him that something was wrong. Abbasi claims he was trying to help in the only way he could because he was simply too far away to lend a hand himself. Even the New York Post has stated that Abbasi did not have the strength to lift him even if he was close enough to help.

While the general consensus is that this photograph should never have been taken, there is little question about the inaction of the people around. Why did none of the other people waiting for the train try to help? Abbasi has made it clear that he was simply too far away to physically help the man; he was firing off shots with his flash to alert the conductor. He also has stated that there were many other people around that also did not help Ki Suk Han. Where is the public outcry about the inaction of all of those that stood by and watched this happen? Where is the outcry about the man who did get away? It seems this is just another instance of people waiting for someone else to do the right thing.

So where does this leave the photograph of Ki Suk Han’s last moments on earth? Did the New York Post have an obligation to post this photograph? Or were they simply trying to use this photograph to generate sales? The public outcry about this photograph is loud and most people seem to feel that this should not have been taken let alone published. The New York Post seems to have forgotten about the family of this man. Instead of remembering him as he left for work, his family will now forever have the lasting image of their father and husband just moments before his death. There is no thought about the lasting effects this will have on his family and friends. The Post should have known better than to run such a graphic image across their paper only the day after his death. The Post never once thought about the fact that this image is not something the public needed to see. Why was there instead not a picture of the man who pushed Ki Suk Han? Why was there simply not a recent picture of the man with a small article about his life and speaking of what a tragedy this is?

If this was a widespread problem that happened several times a day and there were hundreds of people pushing others in front of subways, this might have been appropriate to run. If this was not an isolated incident with one mentally ill man, this might have been appropriate to run. Since this was a single attack, this should picture should never have been published. This does not depict a tragedy that all New Yorkers should be wary of; this is one sick man that did a terrible thing. There is no reason any print or broadcasting agency should have ever shown such a graphic and terrifying picture of this man’s final moments.

Photographers and photojournalists often have to struggle with the proper way to deal with a situation they are in. Everyday citizens are also forced to deal with this question. The New York Post also has to deal with the question of how to handle pictures and stories that are insensitive and grotesque. The only person it seems that made any move to help was the photographer. And he will forever have to live with the fact that he was the one who that the last moments of a man’s life. People reading the story can all claim how they would or would not have handled the situation if they were on that platform.  The truth is, no one will ever know until they are faced with that situation.