LONDON Love&Hate 愛と憎しみのロンドン

1999年のクリスマス・イヴにロンドンに。以来、友人達に送りつけていたプライヴェイト・メイル・マガジンがもと。※掲載されている全ての文章の無断引用・転載を禁じます。
Home未分類 | Dance | Sylvie Guillem | Royal Ballet | Royal Opera | Counselling | Sightseeing | Overseas Travel | Life in London(Good) | Life in London(Bad) | Japan (Nihon) | Bartoli | Royal Families | British English | Gardens | Songs | Psychology | Babysitting | Politics | Multiculture | Society | Writing Jobs | About this blog | Opera Ballet | News | Arts | Food | 07/Jul/2005 | Job Hunting | Written In English | Life in London (so so) | Speak to myself | Photo(s) of the day | The Daily Telegraph | The Guardian | BBC | Other sources | BrokenBritain | Frog/ Kaeru | Theatre | Books | 11Mar11 | Stage | Stamps | Transport | Summer London 2012 | Weather | Okinawa | War is crime | Christoph Prégardien | Cats | Referendum 23rd June | Brexit | Mental Health 

戦争犠牲者の遺体の写真は、観る側にとって「権利」なのか?

2014.08.10
After I came home yesterday, I started to read the Guardian. When I opened the pages about the war in Iraq, I found some photos were put on the pages.

When I caught the last one, my own protection system tried to close my eyes, but it was late. Parents were piling up the body of their dead infants who were killed by the extreme Islam fanatics.

I do wish the Guardian had not used the photo.

イスラエルによるガザへの攻撃がますます非人道的に加速していた7月、ガーディアンのコラムニストの一人、スザンヌ・ムーアさんが以下のことを書いた。

Sharing pictures of corpses on social media isn’t the way to bring a ceasefire
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/21/sharing-pictures-corpses-social-media-ceasefire

How many pictures of dead children do you need to see before you understand that killing children is wrong? I ask because social media is awash with the blood of innocents. Twitter is full of photos of the murdered children of Gaza. Sometimes carried by screaming fathers, sometimes by blood-soaked women. Some bodies are torn to pieces. One no longer has a head.

子供を殺すことが間違っていることを理解する前に、一体、何枚の殺された子供達の写真が必要なのか?ソーシャルメディアは殺された子供達の血で溢れている。トゥィッターはガザで殺された子供達の写真でアフテいる。そこのは泣き叫ぶ父親、血で染まった女性達(すみません、これ以降は翻訳できないです)。

Such images of war, of obscenity, of the “reality” of what sophisticated weapons do are everywhere. There is no more privacy. At one time the media would have thought carefully about which images could be made public. Lines are drawn and then crossed but all notions about respect for the dead have been ripped apart by the advent of social media.

I don’t need to see any more images of dead children to want a ceasefire, a political settlement. I don’t need you to tweet them to show me you care. A small corpse is not a symbol for public consumption. It is for some parent somewhere the loss of a precious person. To make these images common devalues the currency of shared humanity. We do not respect those living in awful conflict by disrespecting their dead. Stop.

 驚いたのは、幾つかのコメントによるムーアさんへの攻撃の熾烈さ。写真を見なければ、戦争の悲惨さを理解できないという人たちの多さに、唖然とするしかない。表面的なことだけど、トゥィッターをしていなくて良かったと心の底から感じた。この二日後に、ガーディアンの写真デスクをしている男性による記事が掲載された。

Graphic content: when photographs of carnage are too upsetting to publish
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/23/graphic-content-photographs-too-upsetting-to-publish-gaza-mh17-ukraine

"I really can't bear to look at that picture for more than a moment, it's just too upsetting." That was the reaction of my colleague, an experienced picture editor, to a photograph of a man kissing his dead child in a Gaza morgue on Tuesday. We were discussing its possible use in the paper. We wanted to show the readers the reality of life – and death – in Gaza but we didn't want to shock or unnecessarily upset them. We tread a fine line and, because each picture is judged on its merits on the day, it is very difficult to have hard and fast rules.

Two headline-grabbing and violent events – the downing of Malaysian Airlines MH17 in Ukraine and Israel's assault on Gaza – have generated some horrific photographs on a seemingly unprecedented scale. Of this flood of images, there are hundreds that we would not choose for publication because they are either deeply shocking, insensitive to human dignity, would be painful if seen by relatives or friends, or ultimately run the risk of forcing readers to turn away from the story, which would negate the purpose of photojournalism.


 この記事を読んでいて驚いたことがある。

In addition to the thousands of photographs supplied by the main wire agencies, such as AP and Reuters, the most prestigious photojournalists' agency, Magnum, has been offering a set of images taken by Jerome Sessini from the MH17 crash site. Sessini certainly didn't hold back and recorded bodies lying in fields where they fell and, in one case, in a room of a local house, having crashed through the roof. This is an astoundingly dark picture. It is basically a still from a horror movie: the person involved has been accorded absolutely no shred of dignity. Magnum was, I think, wrong to offer this picture for sale and indeed followed up the initial email offering the set with another apologising for not warning of the nature of content on offer. The pictures shocked me when I opened the email, but I was shocked again to see them published on Time.com as a photo essay. Time prefaced them with the words, "Warning: some of the following images are graphic in nature and might be disturbing to some viewers." Surely that is more of an invitation to the prurient rather than a warning? This has ensured they have travelled around the world on social media, just like the tweeted pictures of dead children from Gaza that Guardian columnist Suzanne Moore wrote about this week.

 勝手に、マグナムという写真エイジェントは、報道写真を販売しているとはいえ、高い倫理基準を保っているものだと思い込んでいた。結局、営利なんだ。

 「知らせる権利」、「知る権利」の議論はいつも終わりが無い。そこに参加するつもりは無い。全く理由のないまま、その命を暴力によって奪われた人たち、子供達の人間としての尊厳に敬意を払うことを、多くの人が議論することを望む。

関連記事
スポンサーサイト

Comment


管理者にだけ表示を許可する

Template by まるぼろらいと

Copyright ©LONDON Love&Hate 愛と憎しみのロンドン All Rights Reserved.