Read the following articles and answer the following. Does the 1st amendment protect publishing the photo? SHOULD the 1st amendment protect it?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090904/pl_politico/26759
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090904/ap_on_re_as/afghan_death_ap_photo
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes,the first amendment does protect it because of freedom of the press.
ReplyDeleteYes, the first amendment should protect it, because it shows what things really are like overseas.
1) The 1st amendment should protect the father of the marine, the AP should not publish the photo with out parental consent, if the one in the photo cannot.The friends and family of the marine do not want to veiw there friend being killed on the front page of a news paper. It is comon sence to respect the families wishes. The 1st amendment does protect the freedom of he press, but there are limits. There are other photos that could be shown to show the horrible things going on in the Afghan war. The marine photographed is not able to give consent to being photographed, so the AP should not publish the photo without his or his families permission.
ReplyDeleteThe first amendment does protect the publishing of the AP photo. Although after reading it, it really sounds like a battle of morals rather than at war. I believe that if the father of the son who was K.I.A. and not mentioning the defense secretary respectfully asked the AP not to publish the photo then obviously the AP should respectfully not publish the photo. The First Amendment should protect it because it does follow the legal lines of the situation...but once again I believe it is more of a respectful matter rather than a legal one.
ReplyDeleteYes the first amendment protects the publishing of the photo. But the fact that the defense secretary asked them not to publish is a moral situation not a legal situation. The AP should not have published it. But the first amendment should protect it because it falls under the freedom of press.
ReplyDeleteYes the first amendment protects the publishing of this photo. This photo has to do with freedom of the press. Yes, i really think that it should protect it beacuse it is showing us Americans that are at home what is going on while we are here, and our loved ones are fihgitng for us.
ReplyDeleteYes, the first amendment does protect the printing of this picture, which is further illustrated by a statement in the article which says:
ReplyDelete"Casualties may be covered by embedded media as long as the service member's identity and unit identification is protected from disclosure until OASD-PA has officially released the name. Photography from a respectful distance or from angles at which a casualty cannot be identified is permissible; however, no recording of ramp ceremonies or remains transfers is permitted."
Although the media has the right to publish violent or controversial pictures, however, does not mean they should act without moral regard. In this case, I think the paper should have respected the marine’s parent’s wishes, and not published the photo. Although it was within the paper’s right so publish, they should have respected the right of the parents to not have their son’s final moments available for public viewing.
I think the first amendment should allow the publication of this and other pictures because it is important that the press is limited as little as possible. Once you start putting regulations on the press, it is a slippery slope what is and is not allowed. People also have a right to know realistically what is happening in the world. Once again, the press should use these freedoms with decent restraint. In the words of Upton Sinclair, “What good does it do us to fight for freedom abroad if, in the mean time, we are losing it at home?”
I think that the first amendment does cover this photo because there is nothing saying that it doesn't-nor is it in the spirit of the law. Personally, I would not have published it if the parent asked for it not to be published, but it would be covered by the constitution. Besides, the men overseas are fighting for freedom-that is what our country stands for-I don't think that we should be surpressing it.
ReplyDeleteYes, i think that the first amendment does protect the printing of this picture.
ReplyDeleteThe first Amendment should protect this photo and let it be published. Although their should be some consideration of whom the photo is of and their wishing for or against it being published.
The first amendment gives freedom of the press to take and print pictures if the proper information is released or excluded and the publishing of the soldiers photo broke no rules, therefore it is under the protection of the 1st amendment.
ReplyDeleteHowever, though I believe that the press should maintain the right to publish photos like these, I think that they should feel some moral obligation to seek the permission of the soldier's family. The constitution does not explain how to act in every situation. Most of the time it falls upon the people to decide whether what they are doing is right or wrong, and in cases like these the press needs to show extra respect.
Because the photo was published within the press, it is protected by the first amendment- which deals with freedom of expression. Although this is true, I do think that the press should have at least taken the marine’s parent’s thoughts into consideration. With this being such a sensitive situation, I think that the parents should have had some say as to whether or not the picture was published, but I do not think that they should have be granted the final word. If this one photo was edited out due solely to the objection of the parents, then what would stop other people from making the same objections? If the press had not published this photo, the readers would not have been granted the knowledge of the severity of the war’s casualties. The readers of the press deserve to be given the whole news, not just the censored version.
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/wp-content/photos/marine003.jpg
ReplyDeleteThis photo is legally protected by the first amendment, and although people may find offense to it, and reasons can shoot to and fro about its use, it in no way breaches the confines of the amendment; ie slander, threats, etc.
Even though the parents of the marine didn't want the picture to be made public, and the publisher made it so, this act is expressed through the amendment lawfully, and so I think it doesn't matter what the parents or anyone else says, because it's a legal right to publish said photo
ReplyDeleteYes the publishing of the photo is protected by the first amendment because of freedom of the press. On the other I think that it was wrong for the press to release this photo because the family specifically requested for them not too.
ReplyDeleteYes the first amendment does protect protect the freedom of the press and the press is who made this picture public. This was a wrong thing to do becouse the family said not to but the only way they could have prevented that was to pay them off or try to change the law.
ReplyDeletethe first amendment does protect the publishing of the picture with freedom of press. but if this should be the case is harder. i think that the press should take the family´s wish to not print the picture in consideration and try to compromise. for example. publish the picture, but without his name.
ReplyDeleteI think that publishing the photo was extremely untasteful, and totally uncalled for even after the parents had asked for them not to. I do however think that it is covered by the first amendment, as a freedom of the press. I don't think it should be, because it is distructive of other peoples rights to privacy.
ReplyDeleteThe publishing of the picture of Lance Cpl. Joshua M. Bernard taken by an Associated Press photographer then later made public, is in fact protected by the first amendment; freedom of the press. After disgracefully and atrociously neglecting to keep in mind the Lance Cpl.'s family. I believe that there should be some sort of statute, guideline, restriction or something regarding instances like this to protect privacy rights of the deceased and their families, especially when broadcasting to such a broad audience who can access the article in several ways.
ReplyDelete