Chapter Two was surely quite an thought-provoking chapter, covering many thoughtful bits about documentary photography. I was personally very inspired by the part about documentary photography being somewhat formalized in order to present an objective view of the subjects portrayed. When considering how one might go about objectively making a photograph, there always seems to be some minor detail which prevents complete objectivity. There is always some point in the process where the photographer makes a choice, and that prevents perfect objectivity. However, when one truly looks at a photograph and separates the forms within it from some of the context, there is often an amount of unadulterated truth in it.
I was also interested in the story about Drum and the way it popularized the photographic exposé. Despite the fact that such journalism has been relegated to such fantastic papers as the National Enquirer of late, the photographic exposé is a very powerful form of reporting. As such, it has resulted in many facts being made public and has helped a great number of people. On the other hand, it has also wrongly destroyed the reputations of many public figures such as Michael Jackson by encouraging false impressions as extrapolated from the photographs included in the stories. This sort of abuse brings up the point of journalistic responsibility.
• Is it possible to be entirely objective when making a photograph?
• Should/can there be some sort of proper gauge of responsible photojournalism?
