Extra Credit

1. Explain what happened to the man that was killed by the subway and how the photographer was able to take the photo. 

The man who was killed by the subway because he was trying to settle a man who was harassing passengers. The man got angry angry and pushed him into the tracks. The photographer was near the scene and starting taking photographers, but claims he was using his flash to stop the train. 

2. Why did the photographer say he took the photo?

He says he was using the flash on his camera to stop the train, and also says there was no way he could've helped the man anyways. 

3. Do you think the photographer should have taken the photo?

I think it was very wrong to take the photograph, but it captures the hate among people today, and even the evidence of the photograph shows of what humans have become. First of all, an old man who was trying to do good gets pushed into train tracks, putting an end to his life. And then, instead of the photographer trying to help him, to him it is more important to capture a picture that will earn him publicity, rather than try to save a man's life. 

4. Do you think the photographer did the best thing he could have done in this situation? Why or why not?

I don't think that he could've helped the man, because there was just not enough time and he could've not been strong enough, putting his own life in danger. But I think he could've brought someone's attention about, instead of just using flash to "warn" the train. 

5. Do you agree or disagree with the decision to run the photo on the front page of the New York Post? Explain why or why not.

I have contradicting opinions about this question. Because the whole point of the New York Post is to bring news to people, and this is most definitely news. But it also seems inhumane to do this to the relatives of the man, because it magnifies the tragedy that has occurred in their life, creating it into a topic that is being discussed among people. 

6. What is more important to a photojournalist, capturing images of life as it happens or stopping bad things from happening? Why or why not?

The purpose of a photojournalist is to capture the moments of life and to document them, yes it is VERY important to help people in need, but that is a different job. 


7. Do you think it is ever ethically acceptable for a photographer to involve himself/herself in a situation that he or she photographs? Explain why or why not.

If they are helping the person they are photographing, it is of course acceptable to involve yourself in that situation, but I think you should also show the situation of the person before, so it is truly genuine. 

8. Should photojournalists always avoid influencing events as they happen? Explain your answer. 

If there is a way they can save a person's life, it's just morally wrong to not do anything about it. But if it is just a story that doesn't cause much harm to the environment or the photojournalist can't do much about it, I think it's best to stay out of the situation. 

9. After reading the responses from the professional photographers, what stands out as the most appropriate response for a photographer to this situation.

The most appropriate response seems to be to at least attempt to help the man, because all of the responses claim to be "disgusted" by the photographer's actions and that he did nothing to help the man whose life is at stake.