Apparently we struck a really raw nerve today in the photojournalism community when we published a piece about free photo sites and tools for newsrooms that are strapped for resources. (Thread)
-
-
But here’s the thing … There is a reality about producing work in the digital space. We’re all having to find a way to impart information on platforms that demand visuals to be noticed.
Show this thread -
If you read the piece and take it for what we intended it to be — a solution to a problem that’s being felt acutely by web and social media editors in the digital age with diminishing resources — it’s just that and no more.
Show this thread -
We’re not advocating illustrating news stories with stolen images at the expense of hard-working photographers.
Show this thread -
From the feedback we’re getting, we know that this message will just scratch the surface of a deeper conversation that probably needs to happen on this topic. But we wanted you to know that we heard you and we’re listening.
Show this thread -
Some of you have advocated taking the article down or issuing a retraction. We don’t feel either is warranted. But let’s keep the dialogue going, because as one of the writers on the piece said:
Show this thread -
“One of Poynter's biggest roles is to serve as a hub for conversation about journalism. I think if we're seeing things one way and they're seeing things another, it's probably only going to help us to host both sides of that conversation.”
Show this thread -
New conversation -
-
-
I think the article was tone-deaf on a photographer’s and a photograph’s “worth” to a story. By advocating for free services, it’s just lazy
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.