The AP and Getty are both running open casket photos of Chris Henry now, a decision begging the question: is showing the dead body of Chris Henry necessary to the telling of this story? More pointedly rephrased, do we need photos of his daughter leaving a written message in the casket with Henry’s dead body to tell the story? Getty has the defense of photojournalism: they simply capture and provide while news agencies, media organizations, websites, and newspapers make editorial decisions on what to include. You can’t blame Getty for doing their job, especially at a very public funeral with an open casket.
Memo: We’re Taking Pictures At Funerals Now
↵The better question is: does it add value to the story while respecting its subjects, dead and alive? I’d argue not, especially since I don’t want to be involved with the story at that level because it feels far too invasive for my liking, and I assume the reader doesn’t, either. Then again: this is the internet. You have that option if you want or not, and unlike in print can opt in or out as you choose. Freedom’s not without its moments of queasy unease, and this is most definitely one of them. (You have that option here.) (Or not.)
See More:
