Leio em O Público:
A agência noticiosa Associated Press apresentou um pedido formal, com recurso ao Freedom of Information Act, para ter acesso às fotografias e ao vídeo feitos durante a operação no Paquistão que acabou com a morte de Osama Bin Laden. A Casa Branca tem 20 dias úteis para responder e, se negar o acesso às imagens, o caso pode seguir para os tribunais.
O Freedom of Information Act, a lei que permite pedidos de revelação parcial ou total de informação anteriormente não divulgada pelo Governo norte-americano, é o mesmo mecanismo que possibilitou a divulgação dos documentos do Departamento de Defesa dos EUA sobre os prisioneiros de Guantánamo.
Aconteceu em Março, a pedido da Judicial Watch, organismo conservador que também já invocou esta lei, há alguns dias, para conseguir a divulgação das imagens de Bin Laden.
O Presidente Barack Obama decidiu não divulgar as fotografias relacionadas com a morte do antigo líder da Al-Qaeda por entender que estas poderiam ser utilizadas como propaganda pelos terroristas, para incitar à vingança e à violência. A mesma justificação foi dada para manter resguardado do público o vídeo realizado a bordo do "USS Carl Vinson", onde decorreram as cerimónias fúnebres de Bin Laden.
“A Casa Branca de Obama comprometeu-se a ser o Governo mais transparente da história dos EUA e de respeitar muito mais do que a administração Bush a Lei de Liberdade de Informação”, lê-se no pedido formal da Associated Press, que justifica a acção com o “valor-notícia significativo” das imagens.
Uma resposta positiva em Washington não levaria a agência de notícias a publicar tudo o que lhe chegasse à redacção. “Decidiríamos sobre a publicação de todas ou algumas das imagens com base nos nossos padrões editoriais, que incluem factores como bom gosto e capacidade de causar dano ou perigo a outros”, sublinhou o director de relações com os media, Paul Colford, à revista News Photographer.
Existem várias formas legais para a administração norte-americana manter estes registos resguardados. Desde logo porque a Casa Branca está isenta da Lei de Liberdade de Informação, o que torna o pedido não aplicável caso as imagens se encontrem na sede da Presidência dos EUA. Caso estejam na posse do Departamento de Defesa ou da CIA, estas entidades também dispõem de vários mecanismos para negar o acesso, invocando questões de segurança nacional.
(...)
AP Files Legal Request For Bin Laden Photos, Video
by Donald R. Winslow
in News Photographer magazine
in News Photographer magazine
The request includes the photographs of bin Laden dead, which the White House decided last week to keep secret for fear of inciting revenge and violence and potentially being used in the future as propaganda for terrorists.
According to the Freedom of Information Act the government has up to 20 days to answer the request. If the request is denied it can be examined in court.
Should AP win the FOIA request, it doesn't mean the world will automatically see the photographs.
"We would like to obtain images from the raid because we believe they would have significant news value," AP director of media relations Paul Colford told News Photographer magazine today.
"However, we would decide about publishing all or some on the images based on our own editorial standards, which include such factors as tastefulness and whether they could cause harm or danger to others."
There are legal loopholes the government might try to use to block release of the images. The White House is exempt from the FOIA so if the images are controlled there, the request doesn't apply. And both the CIA and the Department of Defense can use a series of national security exemptions to try to block the release of the images.
In their FOIA request, AP said, "The Obama White House 'pledged to be the most transparent government in U.S. history and to comply much more closely with the Freedom of Information Act than the Bush administration did.'"
(...)
From White House To Pakistan, Photos Play Strange Role In Bin Laden Drama
by Donald R. Winslow
in News Photographer magazine
in News Photographer magazine
Questions are now being raised about access to "real" photographs of President Barack Obama, rather than staged or re-created "photo op" moments, the digital alteration of one of the Pete Souza photographs that was released by the White House, and whether bin Laden's death photographs would – or would not – eventually be seen by the world.Today, as the White House announced President Obama's decision to not release U.S. Navy SEALs images of the gunshot body of bin Laden, some members of the photojournalism community are hotly discussing Sunday night's still photo coverage of Obama's live televised address to the world.
While many picture editors who published the image of Obama speaking in their newspapers, and on Web sites, thought the image was from the actual live address, unless it was a video frame grab then it was not. It was staged.
The images of Obama speaking are from a re-enactment of his 11:45 p.m. EDT speech, performed minutes later strictly for the benefit of still cameras. And even though the wire services said as much in their captions, in the heat of rushing Sunday night's late-breaking news into print that fine point was lost in the confusion for some print editors.
In the final minutes of Sunday night as the President walked to a podium in the White House East Room, five still photographers were being held outside in a hallway during the live televised speech. They were Pablo Martinez Monsivais who was shooting for the Associated Press, Jason Reed for Reuters, Chris Kleponis for AFP, Doug Mills of The New York Times (formerly an AP staff photographer), and freelancer Brendan Smialowski – who was filling the ISP (Independent Still Photographer) pool photographer's slot.
They were told by White House Press Office staff to remain silent and they were not allowed to take pictures. They were allowed to shoot a cut-away side view of Obama as he walked past them on the long red carpet toward the podium, but that's all. The only photographers inside the East Room while the President delivered his live speech telling the world bin Laden had been killed by U.S. commandos were White House photographers, including Pete Souza and Chuck Kennedy.
Then, after the live TV address ended, the five still photographers were ushered into the East Room and the President "re-enacted" his red carpet walk to the podium and Obama once again, solely for the benefit of their cameras, read the first 30 seconds or so of his speech from a teleprompter.
Souza and Kennedy's photographs, shown on the White House Flickr feed and the White House Web site and on this page, were taken during the actual live speech according to the image captions. Kennedy shot from beside the TV camera with his camera's mirror in the "locked up" position – for silence – and used the camera's Live View function during the speech, Souza said.
Veteran White House journalists say Sunday night's instance isn't all that different from the many times they shot pictures before or after other Presidential addresses. The "photo op" or re-staging of a Presidential speech for the benefit of still cameras has been a long-standing practice for various administrations, they say. But Sunday night's re-enactment by Obama came to the broader attention of the photojournalism community – as well as the general public – on Tuesday after Reuters photographer Jason Reed blogged about the details online:
"Is this something NPPA approves of?" veteran photography editor and author Bryan Moss asked Tuesday after reading Reed's blog. "A huge moment in history, faked?"“President Obama continued his nine-minute address in front of just one main network camera, the photographers were held outside the room by staff and asked to remain completely silent. Once Obama was off the air, we were escorted in front of that teleprompter and the President then re-enacted the walk-out and first 30 seconds of the statement for us.”
Charlie Nye, a retired assistant managing editor of graphics for two large daily newspapers in Indiana, told News Photographer magazine, "Restaging a historic event like this takes this game they play to a new, unbelievable level."
And a senior CBS News video photojournalist who has covered Washington extensively during his 25 years with the network wrote to News Photographer, "The public has precious little trust in the Fourth Estate as it is ... and the perception among our peers that the White House photographers simply lap up the milk the White House feeds them is NOT justified. However, this solidifies every single doubt many people have about the press: that we cannot be trusted."
Citing the CBS News ethics policy, he also said, "If I stage, I am fired!"
SITUATION ISN'T NEW
Photographers and editors who have covered the White House for many years say that it's a tough situation, but not a new one unique to this administration, and there seems to be no clear-cut solution. The alternative, it seems, would be to get no picture at all because the White House is in total control of their access.David Ake, the assistant bureau chief for photography for the Associated Press in Washington, said that while AP will shoot the White House photo op situation they also strive to shoot some kind of picture of the President before or after the photo op that's not part of what the White House has arranged. Ake said AP photographers will make every effort to shoot a "real" picture.
"Sunday night was rare that it was in the East Room," Ake said. "Usually the President speaks from the Oval Office and in previous times we've been able to make a picture from the Rose Garden through the Oval Office windows as the President actually delivers his address." A case in point, photographers shot the picture Ake just described in 2003 when President George W. Bush told the world through a TV camera that the United States was "in the early stages of disarming Iraq." When the telecast ended, Bush stayed at his desk and photographers were allowed to come in and take pictures of him seated there. Those later images were clearly marked to say the President was "posing for photographers."
On Sunday, Ake also edited out of Monsivais's images a picture of Obama turning to leave, walking past an American flag that was on a standard behind the podium, an image that got some front page play in newspapers with the caption, "President Obama turns to leave after the conclusion of a televised statement Sunday on the death of bin Laden."
A quick check of The Newseum's archive of Monday's front pages showed the speech re-enactment photos were widely published, often paired with a picture of bin Laden. Some captions were written to suggest the photograph was of the President during the actual televised address. Others avoided the issue by writing a caption that pulled a quote or statement of fact from the President's comments or from the accompanying story.
But a few newspapers, such as the Lodi News-Sentinel and The Yuma Sun, were very accurate and transparent in their captions and wrote, "President Barack Obama reads his statement to photographers ...", avoiding the chance for readers to incorrectly assume otherwise.
Michel du Cille, assistant managing editor of photography for The Washington Post, today said it's the paper's policy not to use White House speech-related staged images. But there on the front page of Monday's Post is Reed's photo of Obama via Reuters. The caption doesn't say the picture is – or is not – from the live address. Instead the caption says, "Bin Laden’s death will provide a clear moment of victory for Obama at a time of deep political turmoil overseas."
"It's our policy to not use those staged photos," du Cille said, "but in the heat of deadline Sunday night, we just forgot. It got through. Normally if we're going to use an image from a speech we use the frame grab [from video]."
The New York Times also has a policy of not using these staged photographs, but on the national edition of their Monday paper the AP photo by Pablo Martinez Monsivais of Obama from the re-enactment is on the top-right corner. Its caption says, "President Obama announced that bin Laden was killed in a firefight earlier Sunday."
While this may be the way White House administrations handle still photographers and televised speeches, creating some kind of an opportunity for them to make pictures without "distracting" the President or making too much noise for sensitive network microphones, the practice flies in the face of professional ethics.
The second point of NPPA's 9-point Code of Ethics, revised for the digital era by NPPA Ethics Committee chair John Long, says, "Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities." It follows the first point, "Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects." The code also addresses the photojournalist's role in avoiding presenting photographs that could mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.
“If it looks real, in the context of news, it has to be real," Long said today in response to the news. "A faked photograph is a visual lie; it deceives the reader. Captioning these photos accurately is essential – but in the final analysis these photos look as though the President is speaking and in reality, he is not, making the images themselves visual lies.”
ORIGINAL CAPTIONS DIDN'T DECEIVE
To their credit, on Sunday night the wire services made an effort to point out in captions the fact that the photos were not from the actual live address, but were taken afterwards. If assumptions were made in newsrooms, or if captions were written on copy desks that misstated the circumstances, it wasn't because the information was withheld by the photographers.An examination of the pictures available for viewing by News Photographer magazine today showed that photographers wrote, in one way or another, an accurate statement about the President that said either that he was reading his speech for photographers or that the picture was taken after the live broadcast concluded.
In a caption for a picture by AFP/Getty Images photographer Kleponis, the very first words of the text are, "US President Barack Obama re-creates his speech announcing the death of Osama bin Laden ... ." But in the version of the image distributed directly from AFP the caption to Kleponis's photo says, "US President Barack Obama making a statement at the White House May 1, 2011, announcing the death of Osama bin Laden." This second version doesn't differentiate between being from the actual live address or from the re-enactment afterwards.
The Reuters photo by Reed of Obama standing at the podium, clearly talking, was captioned, "US President Barack Obama is pictured after announcing live on television the death of Osama bin Laden ... ." Reuters also moved on the network a still image that was a frame grab from video taken during the actual speech. That caption reads, "US President Barack Obama announces the death of Osama bin Laden during an address to the nation from the White House in Washington, in this still image taken from video May 1, 2011."
The caption to Smialowski's pool photograph of Obama standing behind the podium says, "US President Barack Obama stands after addressing the nation on TV from the East Room of the White House to make a televised statement May 1, 2011 in Washington, DC. President Obama announced that Osama bin Laden has been killed. UPI/Brendan Smialowski/POOL."
At AP, Ake found it somewhat incredible that picture editors would not know – because of the specific captions, circumstances, and history – that the Obama images were not taken during the actual televised speech. Asked what he might do next time to make sure editors are aware of the circumstances, Ake said he will probably begin each photograph's caption with an advisory or cautionary statement so that there can be no doubt in the mind of a picture editor who is reading the text to know immediately what the circumstances are. He said he may also consider moving an Advisory on the photo network, an additional step to make sure everyone involved on a newspaper's desk is informed, which could include designers and copy editors along with the picture editors.
WHITE HOUSE DIGITALLY ALTERED PHOTO FOR SECURITY
One of the most widely-used photographs of the week came out of the White House photography department and the camera of Obama's personal photographer, Pete Souza, formerly a daily newspaper staff photographer and college photojournalism professor.
The image shows the President, Vice President, Secretary of State, and members of the National Security Council in the White House Situation Room as they watch television and computer screens and listen to audio of the commando raid in Pakistan as it unfolded in real time. Faces and body language convey the tense, anxious mood of the room, and at the time the picture was taken it was not yet known whether bin Laden was in the compound or whether he, or anyone else, had been killed or injured. It is an iconic and classic - if not modern - war room image.The only problem is that a piece of paper on the keyboard of a laptop in front of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was a top secret document. It appears to be a satellite image of bin Ladin's compound.
For most editors the gravity of the moment and the facial expressions of the government's key players seems to have outweighed the ramifications of using a photograph that was both digitally altered and provided by the White House staff.
Before they released the image the White House digitally obscured the content that was printed on the piece of paper, but only within the confines of the paper. They also pointed out in their caption that the image was altered. Most newspapers and magazines who ran the picture acknowledged in their captions, or in other text nearby, that the image had been altered at the source ( the White House). AP advised in their caption that it was a White House photo, not an AP photo, and that it had been moved on the network with AP's prior knowledge that it had been digitally altered by the source. One caption advisory said, "The White House digitally altered this image to diffuse the paper in front of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton."
If it is a satellite photo of bin Laden's Pakistan compound, one wonders what could be in the image that needs to be hidden? As many times as satellite photographs of the remote mansion appeared on television and the Internet in the following hours, one might ask what difference it makes if Clinton's copy of a satellite image appears small, almost inconsequentially, in the composition of one of Souza's hand-out photographs that's been posted on Flickr.
The difference is that Souza's images are posted in high resolution and at a large size, big enough for a magazine like Time or Newsweek or Life to run the image as a double-truck and it would look very good. With that kind of resolution, and the odds of such an historic image being used large, the secret document on Clinton's desktop just might give away too much information. An astute image analysis, with the appropriate technology, might be able to uncover too much information about the extent of America's ability to capture high-resolution spy images from space, as well as potentially deduce from the contents of the image just when the photograph was taken. That type of information could be valuable in determining how quickly America's spy satellites can turn around information, whether it's in days, hours, minutes, or real-time, as well as give away just how long U.S. spys have been keeping an eye on the building.
PHOTOS OF DEAD BIN LADEN
The news media watched and waited Tuesday and Wednesday while the White House said they were pondering the decision whether to release photographs of bin Laden after he was shot and killed by U.S. Navy SEALs and of his burial at sea from the deck of an American aircraft carrier.According to the Pentagon and White House account of how the raid ended, bin Laden was shot once in the chest and once in the face by SEAL commandos. Officials said SEALs then photographed bin Laden's face and uploaded the image immediately to those who were in control of the raid. They used "facial recognition software" on the image to confirm that it was indeed bin Laden, the government says.
The photograph, according to White House press secretary Jay Carney, is graphic. It supposedly shows an open head wound, brain tissue, and skull. The White House carried on a two-day public hand-wringing campaign while it weighed the decision about whether to release or withhold the graphic image, giving the talking heads of Washington and Administration officials an opportunity to publicly weigh in on the ramifications.
In the end, Carney said, the President decided against showing the world the photographs. Carney even so much as hinted that Obama was against releasing the photos all along but wanted to give his senior advisors an opportunity to convince him otherwise if there was a compelling reason. But Carney said the President didn't want the graphic images to serve as incitement to violence or propaganda tools. There was also some fear over how foreign nations might react to the graphic depiction.
Carney said that Obama said, "We don't trot out trophies. That's not who we [Americans] are." And Obama said in a 60 Minutes interview on CBS, "We don't need to spike the football." The president also told Steve Kroft of CBS that he had seen the photographs himself, in person. "It was him. There's no doubt we killed Osama bin Laden."
As recently as yesterday, CIA director Leon Panetta had said that he was sure the photographs would be "ultimately released." But today the President said that his entire team, including Panetta, was now in agreement that it was in America's best interest to withhold the secret images.
"We don't think that a photograph in and of itself is going to make any difference," Obama told Kroft.
But given the nature of the Internet, observers note that it is probably only a matter of time before the authentic bin Laden death picture surfaces online somewhere. And governments do have a way of changing their mind as political circumstances change and election campaigns come and go, so the picture may remain secret for now – but not forever.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário