New York Times photo of starving child ‘example of the raw, unfiltered definition of news photography’

The New York Times
In the Times’ “Story Behind the Story” email newsletter for subscribers, photojournalist Tyler Hicks describes his photo of an emaciated child in Mogadishu, which the Times ran on its front page one day in August to accompany a story about the famine in southern Somalia. “I could see that this image, however disturbing to view, would give proof of how desperate the situation had become,” Hicks writes. The public reaction was positive, not only among readers, but among other media and aid groups, he says. “This is an example of the raw, unfiltered definition of news photography. … Sometimes you land on a story, a cause, something that has meaning to you, and the resulting photographs have an impact. They are seen and spur reaction. In a digital age, that’s when you’re reminded of the impact that a still, motionless photograph can have.” || Related: Keller says decision to run photo of starving Somali child on NYT’s A1 ‘a no-brainer’

We have made it easy to comment on posts, however we require civility and encourage full names to that end (first initial, last name is OK). Please read our guidelines here before commenting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1033806645 John Parker

    It’s pretty poor praise for this one “bravery.” The Times should have been running raw photos of our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere with the same independence the media had in the late 1960s and ’70s. Start showing readers the truth every day, and I’ll rave on about the NYT setting the standard again.

  • Anonymous

     I see the Times still hasn’t stopped congratulating themselves for that one photo they ran a month ago. I’m guessing it won’t stop until they pull a Pulitzer for it.