Did photographer cross the line?

[terri]

Well said. This whole debate is really petty, given what is happening elsewhere in the world.

Now, now. This IS a photography forum, and anyone is free to debate, discuss, or question the motives or antics of another's work.

Like it or not, this topic has been of interest recently to the photographic society. No one has suggested this displaces the importance of global issues.

 

[ksmattfish]

To be honest, the debate seems less about Greenberg's work, and more about Hawk's over-reaction, and the ensuing soap opera. Whatever their public lines, I'm sure both of them are loving the publicity. Calling Greenberg a child abuser and child pornographer is as silly as when some politician compares their opponent to the ****'s, or themselves to Rosa Parks.

I'm a father of 2 young children, and watching the news (both international and local) almost makes me cry, but when I visited these photos the only thing that made me cringe was the hideous, overdone, photoshopping.

EDIT: hmmm.... that would be: " N A Z I "

 

[Don Simon]

There are plenty of situations where children are suffering real abuse in this world that the media could focus on instead, but this has got a nice, glossy finish that's easy to forget. People would rather get irrate over healthy American toddlers being denied sweets than middle eastern babies with their skin burned off.

Again, well said. A healthy child in the West is given sweets and has said sweets taken away. Cries for a few seconds while photos are taken, then presumably is given back the confectionary, stops crying and goes on with his/her healthy comfortable life, suffering no more psychological damage than if he/she had simply demanded sweets from their parents in a store and been told "no". At which they would also have cried. And we're supposed to be shocked and appalled. At the same time, a significantly higher number of children are being shot and blown up, in addition to those who are as a matter of course being starved, abused, murdered, or working themselves to death. But we see that in the papers all the time, and it's happening comfortably far away.

People are completely within their rights to protest behaviour they consider abusive or unfair... but with any sense of scale and perspective, the same people writing and posting criticism of this Greenberg should surely be taking up arms in response to the other stuff happening in the world?

 

[darin3200]

Again, well said. A healthy child in the West is given sweets and has said sweets taken away. Cries for a few seconds while photos are taken, then presumably is given back the confectionary, stops crying and goes on with his/her healthy comfortable life, suffering no more psychological damage than if he/she had simply demanded sweets from their parents in a store and been told "no". At which they would also have cried. And we're supposed to be shocked and appalled. At the same time, a significantly higher number of children are being shot and blown up, in addition to those who are as a matter of course being starved, abused, murdered, or working themselves to death. But we see that in the papers all the time, and it's happening comfortably far away.

People are completely within their rights to protest behaviour they consider abusive or unfair... but with any sense of scale and perspective, the same people writing and posting criticism of this Greenberg should surely be taking up arms in response to the other stuff happening in the world?

But just because worse things are happening doesn't mean we shouldn't also focus on other issues. It's the type of logic that others have it worse so we shouldn't every complain about anything.

"That guy just stole my car"
"Well it's better than being working poor and building cars for 12 hours a day, every day. Stop whining"

We have the capacity to address issues of things being stolen, as well the conditions under which they are made. The same applies to this issue.

 

[Don Simon]

We have the capacity to address issues of things being stolen, as well the conditions under which they are made. The same applies to this issue.

We also have the capacity to address the bigger issues. But we don't. The vast majority of us always focus on these smaller issues, because it's easier. It's the same logic that leads us to rant at the guy behind the counter and then feel like we've achieved something, when it's not him we should be complaining to.

"That guy just stole my car"
"Well it's better than being working poor and building cars for 12 hours a day, every day. Stop whining"

Fair point, but there's no car being stolen here. Not even the sweets are being stolen. They're being taken back. If someone steals your car you go to the police, you make damn sure you get your car back and/or the thief is caught and sentenced. If on the other hand someone says they're thinking of giving you a free car, lets you take it for a test drive and then says you can't have it after all... then gives you it anyway when you get upset... is that the same thing?

 

[terri]

but when I visited these photos the only thing that made me cringe was the hideous, overdone, photoshopping.

Hear hear!

And the price tags made me laugh.

 

[rmh159]

As everyone has chimed in by now and this thread just goes to prove that her questionable methods DO in fact get her TONS of discussion / publicity / money... I'll leave you with this idea:

Maybe the kids were porkers and could stand to lose a candy bar or two. I know a few adults that would probably cry too... THAT'S a photo-op.

In all seriousness I think it was summed up best by the idea that if we want start solving the world's problems this one should be somewhere near the bottom of the list. That's about as much thought as I'd give this cheap attempt for publicity.

 

[Dakarthanblu]

As everyone has chimed in by now and this thread just goes to prove that her questionable methods DO in fact get her TONS of discussion / publicity / money... I'll leave you with this idea:

Maybe the kids were porkers and could stand to lose a candy bar or two. I know a few adults that would probably cry too... THAT'S a photo-op.

In all seriousness I think it was summed up best by the idea that if we want start solving the world's problems this one should be somewhere near the bottom of the list. That's about as much thought as I'd give this cheap attempt for publicity.

You know, you're right, the subject deserves a lot less space than it's been given, I mean, with all the outrage this incident has caused I've forgotten all about the wholsale slaughter in Iraq, the perpetually fruadulent search for a bearded madman in Afghanistan, the nuclear ambitions of a dictator with an Oedipal complex, and a bloody, decades old real estate war in the mid-east. Thanks, I'd almost forgotten all of that.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

I really dont' give a rat's a** what she does, they are good photo's IMO, and they really show human emotion.

What I do think is complete horse s*** is that she tries to connect it to US government policies.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I am reminded of a question I asked about the videographer on survivor austrailia when the man burned his hand. they kept shooting while he was in large pain. The producer said he would have fired him if he had stopped shooting to help.

The explaination that hit home is everyone knew the rules and the camera man followed them. In this case the parents knew exactly what to expect. they are ultimately the ones responsible for the care of their child.

 

[Luke]

hehe, if you actually take the time to look at her work, it is the biggest BS ive ever seen. Australian artists seem to have a fancy for Bulls**tery but shes got it down too.
Child abuse???? hahahah, i think not, bit mean, but hey, they probly cry more that day if they hadnt got to go to a cool studio with mum and dad.
Crappy art??? probably

 

[NoteGraphics]

My main feeling is that the shots are "manipulative". If trying to portray a representation of sadness or loss can only be acheived by stealing back the candy, then the shot is a setup and not the reportage it purports to be.

Toying with the emotions of a child in a vunerable environment whilst one makes capital, gets coverage and furthers a reputation in a safe western world...
Not illegal no.
Just.. Morally corrupt.


Thats my 2c worth - anyone have change for a $5 ?

 

[castrol]

Good grief... it's not like she is hitting them to make them cry...

 

[DocFrankenstein]

Do you want to make money from making children cry? Yeah, it's not illegal, just sort of sick.

American are overconcerned about child abuse. You can't photograph your children in public and label people as "sex offenders" just because it's a good story for the media.

Children get upset easily. They throw histerics and get over it fast.

What's wrong with documenting negative emotions? Are you so sensitive that you can't stand it in art? Or did you decide for yourself that you won't photograph negativism and trying to force your beleifs on others?

Does violence happen in your universe or do you prefer the rosy-sunglasses newsstream?

To each it's own. I enjoyed the gallery and the monkey exhibit.