Chapter one - Can photographs change the world?

     Can photographs change the world?  When asked this question, my initial thought reminds me of Kevin Carter’s photo of a vulture praying on a famished African child. A photo of such nature is breath-taking and unforgettable. This photo shows the reality of poverty in some countries in Africa. It is evident, Africa does not have the resources nor assistance that it needs. This photo was taken with intent to spread awareness about the poverty in South Sudan, Africa. From an opposing standpoint this also caused criticism toward Kevin Carter. The public felt like he should have done more to help. On the contrary, this photo received an extreme amount of publicity and awareness to poverty, which is commonly overlooked. 

Photo by Kevin Carter 

     A photograph by Therese Frare showed David Kirby, a young man with AIDS, laying in his deathbed. This image affected me tremendously. This photo expresses the pain and devastation that this patient and his family endured. This affected me personally because as a nurse you are required to advocate, thoroughly treat, comfort, and care for your patient. You create interpersonal relationships, especially when your patient has a chronic illness. Sometimes no matter how well you care for a patient, the outcome can still be fatal. Not only did this photo affect me, it changed the face of AIDS and made the epidemic a reality. It is sad that David Kirby had to be photographed during his final breaths to create awareness, yet it is empowering that one image can create such an impact on so many people. 

Photo by Therese Frare

   
  In the video, "Do Photographs Change the World?" by Professor Nordell, he says, "If a tree falls in the woods, and there is no photojournalist to take a picture of it, did that event even happen? Can that event become part of history?" The answer to those questions is no. Images create security and proof of history. When a photojournalist captures a subject that may be controversial or eye-opening, it raises awareness to the photo. For example, Alexander Zemlianichenko captured an image of Boris Yeltsin dancing at a rock concert during his reelection campaign. According to the video, Photograph of Yeltsin Dancing, Alec Lune says the photo "was part media coverage that convinced the Russian public that the president was healthy enough for another term and help and helped tip the election in his favor." This photo won a Pulitzer-prize, helped Yeltsin win the election and changed Russian history! 

     Images change the world but are often restricted and censored by companies, the government, and publishers. According to the website Lexico, censorship is defined as: "The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security." Restricting images and media creates a disconnect between people and their community. Dan Gillmor writes in Ferguson’s citizen journalists revealed the value of an undeniable video, "Antonio French, an alderman in nearby St Louis, spent days posting to Twitter pictures and a series of videos of the demonstrations and police actions that he captured on his mobile phone – and was reportedly arrested and then released on Wednesday evening." In this situation, censorship is used to protect law enforcement and prevent people from witnessing the reality of police brutality.

     Not only is media censored, but is also controlled by large media companies. Major companies like Disney, Warner, and AT&T have ownerships over many brands in commercial media. According to the article, Big Media Companies And Their Many Brands — In One Chart by Alina Seluk, "The Walt Disney Co. has bid more than $52 billion to buy much of 21st Century Fox." Large media companies are trying to increase their value by buying smaller brands to profit from. This is concerning because very few corporations own all of the United States media. According to the article, How Media Consolidation Threatens Democracy: 857 Channels (and Nothing On), John Light says, "It means that as print and broadcast journalism struggles to remain profitable in the face of free, online alternatives, hard financial decisions that affect reporters and the stories they tell will be made in corporate boardrooms." Media is becoming less about personal views and and more about a company standard. Corporate consolidation provides less of a variety in media.