News-Record.com

I recall growing up visiting homes where pictures of of family members in caskets were common. I never really got it; however, it was like a memory for these people. When their family members died, they had big celebrations of life and for some reason, a picture of a person in a casket was a fond memory.

I am still uneasy with viewing the deceased. A web page is optional, a newspage is not.

It's most definitely a tough decision, but I would have run the photo. As you mention, the family consented to having the photographer there and to having him/her take the photo.

I also think the photo does a tremendous job of illustrating the tragedy of a young man who lost his life and is both touching and powerful in illustrating his family's grief.

and I think the photo is both touching and powerful

"The general reasoning behind it is that people eating breakfast don't want to look at dead bodies. We would make -- and have made -- an exception if publishing served a compelling civic purpose. (There's that darned phrase again!)"

Ah, but people eating breakfast don't mind seeing Abu Ghraib pictures? Oh wait-- THOSE pictures serve "a compelling civic purpose", right?

Open caskets are outside my heritage and culture. I'm just not used to seeing them, save for a few funerals (Irish, Italian, other ethnicities) when I was growing up in NY. (Surprisingly, most I've attended in the last lotta years here have not had open caskets.) Honestly, I think a photo of a family around a casket without the dearly departed's face would do the same thing journalistically, you think?

Yes, Bubba, I would hope that readers saw a purpose behind those photos, but we've had this conversation before, haven't we?

Yes, Sue, the right shot could.

Having experienced too many deaths in my family starting at a very early age for me I would opt for the nice portrait of the deceased instead of the casket. Some things are just too private even when the photographer is invited to be present.

Images, moving or still, are just more powerful than written words, and as a writer I don't like to admit that.

Which is why I think mass media outlets need explicit policies about how we use provocative images. It's also the reason why those policies should directly acknowledge the intangible power of seeing.

I'd wager that most newspapers have unwritten photo policies based on avoiding calls from upset readers, and I've enforced such policies and dealt first-hand with the tender emotions of families in mourning.

But if the net effect of such policies is to present an picture of the world that "cleans up" an otherwise ugly reality, then we have to ask whether we're meeting our responsibilities or taking the easy way out.

Not an easy or simple call. I look forward to reading what y'all produce.

John,

This is a bit off subject but the two pictures relating to the President's India trip, chosen by the phantom selecter at the N & R, which appeared on pages A1 and A3 were excessively gratuitous.
The front page showed the foot of a " Muslim protestor" stomping a photograph of the President, while the one on A3 was a group of mostly Indian women, one holding a sign : " Bush Go Back ".

Even the AP story that you ran mentioned that a Pew research poll indicated that 70% of the Indian people held a favorable view of the US. The partisanly slanted story rolled out a litany of Bush recent so-called " backlashes " including the VPs freaking hunting accident. The N & R is in a race to the bottom with Kieth Olberman, Chris Matthews and the NY Times.

BTW the Times today printed a correction regarding two front page stories run Saturday in which the reporters misrepersented the role to be played by Dubai Ports World. Fact checkers wanted. Apply inside.

Shoot, Fred. I thought you'd praise us for not putting the story on the front page about the president actually knowing before Katrina hit that the levees could be breeched and that rescuers could be overwhelmed, contradicting what he said after the storm hit.

John,

Nice try at changing the subject. A reader makes a serious comment about what appears to be bias ( walks like a duck etc )and you give a nonchalant response and make no effort to provide the usual transparently mysterious and incomprehensible explanation.

You obviously have a hearing or reading comprehesion gap. Max Mayfield said "topped " not " breached " and so what the president said 5 days later was true and you are just repeating the AP lie. Tsk tsk ( please note I am using 3 letter words so don't delete this )

Gee, Fred, the way you talk people might think that we haven't carried on this same good-natured conversation for a couple years.

I know where you are on this newspaper and President Bush, and I didn't read your first comment as one asking for an explanation. You've accused us of bias. If we were actually using the paper to bash the president wouldn't we have printed the AP story across the top of the front page? Wouldn't we have played up the recent polling that suggests his favorables are lower than he'd like? Why would we pass up those opportunities?

You say it's bias we ran the photo. I say it's just an interesting photo. If you're right, I hope I'll hear from you when we run a photograph of the president with a "positive" story, such as when he addresses Congress or holds a news conference or some such.

John,

I could point out more than one of my LTE or personal notes that have supported the news department, op-ed section and staff writers at the N & R but I won't bother. I will however be sure and call your attention to the very next thing the paper does that meets with my approval.

If the person in the photo doesn't LOOK dead -- and Smith doesn't in that photo -- then I don't see a problem with it.

He just looks like he is sleeping...

It's sad, though.

I know I'm late in getting in to this discussion.

But as the reporter on this, I think Joe's photo did a better job than my story in relaying what the story was really about - a young life cut way too short in what appears to be a tragic accident.

Why? Because in one second you can see the sadness and pain that Keith Smith's parents were struggling with. Anyone can relate to that. And even though I was in that room, there some times when words just don't do it justice.