The Hard Truth

Franklin and Fellow Classmates,

After reviewing the article and the photographs, I am compelled to agree with Van that AP acted appropriately. The photograph in question was taken at a distance and does not appear to be gratuitously graphic. In fact, the Pulitzer Prize winning articles from Franklin's e-mail contain photographs that are at least as disturbing. Bernard was alive at the time the picture was taken, without any assumption that he would not survive. To their credit, AP did delay the release until after Bernard's burial. After that, they had a responsibility to the public to run the story as an honest representation of the war.

When journalists are embedded with military units, is it not logical that whatever happens is on the record? Of course expletives can be deleted and nudity digitized, but relevant facts need to be included even when they are unpleasant, perhaps especially so. Casualties have a way of becoming abstractions and warfare a banality to many of those who do not have a personal connection. A democratic society functions best when an informed public takes responsibility for the actions carried out in its name. It is the role of the media to provide the information. For the Secretary of Defense to ask AP not to release the photograph is the equivalent of asking that a statement be retroactively taken off the record.

Regarding the photographs from previous wars, the ones from WWII and Vietnam do not show the faces of the dead. They capture the grim reality of war without invading anybody's privacy. The photograph from the Civil War could be viewed in the context of the time. Executions were still public in parts of the United States. People had a much greater intimacy with death in those days. Given a similar situation today, I would avoid presenting photographs that allow dead subjects to be identified.