Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Text
Reading Response #7
Photojournalism is an ever evolving practice, and in a world where news outlets don't try to hide their biases photographers are allowed and encouraged to photograph events in a way that fits the story rather than photographing them in an accurate way and then writing a story from the truth. With all of the “fake news” and “alternative facts” shared by various media publications and the continued success of those publications it almost seems as though the people that follow them don't care about the truth and are more concerned with validating their own beliefs, whatever they may be. The incentive to be an honest photojournalist doesn't exist anymore, as people are often rewarded for creating images that fit a specific narrative rather than creating images that showcase an event in its entirety.
0 notes
Text
Reading Response #6
Truthfulness is something that all photojournalists should strive for, but it is becoming less and less of a priority as technology develops and society becomes more cynical towards media. Photographs, similar to words, are nothing more than tools to be used to communicate a message, which naturally takes on the bias of whoever is constructing the message. It seems that, while there may have been a time when people had absolute faith in what they saw in photographs, we are moving into a world where the public questions the bias behind the photographs and stories they consume. This has lead to photojournalists to be more open about their biases, and I wonder if this is the healthiest thing for photojournalism moving forward. The positive is that people can have more faith in the media, because they are more open about their biases and motivations, but it means that any kind of media that tries to be objective will be immediately distrusted because they aren't open about their biases.
0 notes
Text
Reading Response #5
I feel like this reading is closely tied to last weeks, in its discussion of the “real” art in contrast with the “copy”. In current society, artists are pushed out of the studio and into the online realm of instagram and the like, due to the reach that those platforms offer. Gone are the days where galleries are the only place you could consume art, now we have hundreds of thousands of artists at our fingertips. This has lead to more artists focusing on their online presence in order to make a living and continue to create art. The problem is that because the art is no longer a physical work, it is available to anyone that knows how to take a screenshot. At this point, even though the screenshot is not the original artwork, it can be disseminated against the intentions of the artists because there is a lack of punishment for doing so. In this way, our capitalist society has both helped and harmed the art world, because the more accessible art becomes, the less meaning we (the viewers) can be sure of.
0 notes
Text
Reading Response #4
This reading comments on the latest movement in a long history of movements that challenge the artistic status quo. This is just the way that art evolves. Without innovations, we would still be painting portraits of royalty. The major difference between this movement and other evolutions of art is that it relies heavily on the public rather than being controlled by the “elite” class (artists). Through the use of social media art is able to evolve more quickly and (arguably) more naturally. Art on social media is a democracy, with the most popular forms rising to the top, whereas in the past it was curated by a select few (those in charge of galleries, magazines, etc). The selfie culture that has been popularized in recent years allows the public to not only have a say in art, but to be an active participant. While some people are busy questioning the validity of selfies, the rest of the art community is moving forward to new and exciting innovations.
0 notes