World Press Photo Of The Year
Share:
A photograph taken by the Turkish photographer Burhan Özbilici of the assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey last December has been named the World Press Photo of The Year. The photo shows both the assassin and the ambassador, Andrei Karlov, who is lying shot on the floor. It is by all means an incredibly powerful photo, if an extremely disturbing one. It’s also notably the third time a photo of an assassination has been awarded the accolade, the most famous example being a photo taken by Eddie Adams in 1968 of the shooting of a Vietcong suspect.
Stuart Franklin, who was the chair of the 2017 World Press Photo award jury, wrote an article for The Guardian on why he was opposed to it becoming photo of the year, in which he described it as “morally as problematic to publish as a terrorist beheading,” going on to describe how he feared amplifying a terrorist’s message through allowing the publicity which would go hand in hand with the prize. The argument over how we should cover terrorist acts, and how sensationalism may lead to martyrdom, is an ongoing one, and one which is becoming increasingly relevant today.
I have, in previous articles, refused to mention the name of those who have carried out vicious attacks. Research has shown that sensationalist reporting on mass killings or assassinations are what persuade others to carry out similar acts; they do terrible things in order to make a point or to gain some infamy, and by covering in great detail horrendous events, we are inspiring others to seek what they see as distinction. Now, when ideas and propaganda are so easily spread, we can not afford to make mistakes in journalism, and finding a way to give balanced coverage without hyperbole is crucial. That is not to say we should not be drawing attention to acts of terrorism, but that we need to think about how we do this so as to focus on the event and those who have been victim to it, and think less about the person who actually committed the crime.
In this sense, I agree with Franklin. How I feel about the relation of current events to art (in this case I think photography does need to be evaluated as art, but that is another argument in and of itself) is another matter, and I wonder perhaps how strictly we can see the two as interwoven and how exceptions can be made. Is a photo, because it shows something which is to be at the centre of a news story or wide discussion, automatically part of news itself? Is this determined by who took the photo, and if this person was a journalist or a photographer? Perhaps, since photography alone does not claim to be a news source on its own, we can afford to allow images such as this acclaim, because they capture something powerful and that’s what art (if we can call it art) has always tried to do. Since there has been art, and more recently since there has been photography, people have used it to express ideas and capture events. On the other hand, in this context we are looking at World Press Photo of the Year, and does this then change how we consider it? Would we look at it differently in a different context? It’s a complicated argument, and maybe it is worth some thought into how we look at terrorist acts and ideas, and if we can change the way we treat them, in order to move out of toxic circles of events and excuses for propaganda.