Poynter Online
Go


Top Story

Public TV, Radio Stations to Increase Local Investigative Coverage
Most Recent Articles
1.Poynter's Times Publishing Co. sells Governing
5:15 PM Nov. 20, 2009
2.Recommendation for Fewer PAP Screens Sure to Set Off Controversy
10:32 AM Nov. 20, 2009
3.Gene Patterson to Jack Nelson: Save Us a Desk Up There in That Celestial Newsroom
7:03 AM Nov. 20, 2009
4.Public TV, Radio Stations to Increase Local Investigative Coverage
6:19 AM Nov. 20, 2009
5.Woods: Plagiarism Never Justified
3:47 PM Nov. 19, 2009
Most E-mailed
Recent Comments
Recent Tags
Community Activity

Poynter Training
Poynter Seminars
Small, in-person training experiences.
1.
A New Curriculum for a New Journalism - Jan. 6-8, 2010
Apply by November 23
2.
Multimedia Journalism for College Educators - February 1-5, 2010
Apply by December 14
3.
NewsU: Write Your Heart Out: The Craft of the Personal Essay - January 25-February 19, 2010
Apply by January 4
News University
Today's most popular courses on NewsU, Poynter's e-learning site for journalists.
Webinars
Our online classroom is just a click away. Learn more.
All Webinars

Poynter Forums

View Forum Post

Topic: Letters Sent to Romenesko
Date/Time: 4/20/2007 11:48:53 AM
Title: Why isn't wrong for NBC to alter Cho images?
Posted By: Jim Romenesko
 
From DAVID HANNERS: An odd question struck me yesterday while scanning the front page of my paper, the St. Paul Pioneer Press, and our cross-metro rival. It combines the Cho Seung-Hui/NBC and Allan Detrich/Toledo Blade imbroglios.

The Pioneer Press and the other paper (and many other papers, I'm sure) ran the same image: A menacing Cho, arms outstretched, handgun in each hand. The upper left corner of our photo contained a black rectangle with the NBC News logo, which I am told is how the photo was distributed by NBC. The photo in the other paper was cropped a bit closer, and while it still contained the area where the rectangle was, there was no rectangle. It had been removed. (For the record, our photo had an "NBC via Associated Press" credit line, while the other paper's photo was "NBC via Agence France-Presse/Getty Images.")

So here are my questions:

1) Since it was wrong for Detrich (and anyone else) to alter a photo, why isn't it wrong for NBC News to alter these photos by pasting its logo on them? At least Detrich acted out of some misguided desire to improve the "art" of his photos. NBC News did it for branding reasons, like product-placement in some movie. Isn't it enough to credit NBC in the credit line of the photo? What would happen if we started sticking our paper's logo in the background of every photo we ran?

2) If the photo was distributed by NBC News with the network's logo on it, is it wrong for a paper to remove it? Or is removing it considered ok since it is returning the photo to its "original," unadulterated form, i.e., the way it looked when Cho took the picture and before NBC News got hold of it?

It seems that in the interest of consistency, we should be getting on someone's case for altering the Cho photo. We should either be criticizing NBC News for plastering its peacock on the photo, or we should be railing against the other paper for removing the logo. [Permalink]

View Complete Forum Topic

Username
Password
New User? Signup Now
Poynter Careers
See All Jobs
Add Your Resume
Post Your Job
Become a Member
More media jobs