Ethical Issues

bfeldman

Member
We have been having a dilema in our newsroom about using "fake" sound in a story. One of the photographer-reporter teams we have went out on a story about how do greens keepers take care of the course when we are in a drought. One of the shots was of the ball going into the cup. Obviously a nat sound opportunity. However, it was really windy that day and they did not get good sound of the ball going into the cup. So instead they went and just placed the mic in the cup and rolled the mall into there to get the sound. When they went to go edit the story they used the first shot and placed the sound from the other shot underneath. I feel like this is could be an ethics issue. Am I right when thinking this or is there nothing wrong with doing this to get better sound.
 

Run&Gun

Well-known member
In that instance, I don't have a problem with it, but it's a slippery slope and everyone can make an argument why it's OK in their situation. I think an example was used earlier on this board about some surveillance video of a shooting where there was no sound, but the editor added the sound effect of gun-shots in on the package, that I do have a problem with. Same idea/delima, but two different types of stories and opinions. I don't think you're really misrepresenting anything in the story by "enhancing" the sound of a golf ball falling into the cup on the green, where as, in my opinion, adding the sounds of gun-shots in on the video where none exist is just being done to sensationalize the story. But there are people that move NATS around in stories all the time. You can make the argument that if it didn't happen, then don't use it, it's staging, but I don't think it changes anything in this story in this situation. Kinda like if you were shooting a creek, but you couldn't get the mic close enough while you were shooting the the shot you needed to get good NATS of the water running/bubbling, so you would shoot your shot, then move closer to get the audio. You would like to think that most people posses the ability/judgement and scruples to know when you can and can't do something that will change the facts or misrepresent something in a story, but we all know that's not true and that's why there are black-and-white-rules sometimes because some people go too far into the grey...
 

rocky1138

Well-known member
I'll have to agree w/ what Run& Gun said. It can be very dangerous if you don't understand why it can be dangerous.

On many weather stories I have gotten the vid & the nats seperate. Mainly b/c it is just me. If I had a soundie we could get it all at once.

I have also replaced "room tone" from some VO my chief shot once. On the raw he was chatting away to the reporter & using a bunch of curse words. I was able to find about 8sec of where he kept his mouth closed & layed that in a couple times just to make sure there was some audio on the track.
 

redcoat

Well-known member
I think this instance of faking nats is an acceptable enhancement to the story. However, I agree that it's always good to remain skeptical and think things through before doing something like this.

I think this specific instance is ok because video and nat sound are not always meant to be perfect representations of reality. Often times in the edit bay you'll cut together sequences of video from moments that occurred at different times to give the illusion of continuity. For example, you might cut a shot of a pitcher throwing a ball together with a separate shot of a batter hitting a ball. The batter didn't hit the exact ball that the pitcher threw, but making it look as if he did isn't unethical. In such instances, it's more about presentation than perfectly representing reality.
 

TexasDave

Well-known member
You should also give the shooter credit for thinking this way. He wanted to make sure the story had quality audio, and didn't want to use the windy nats. I've done things to this before. You're enhancing the piece.

I had to do a 'makeover' piece, and I wanted to use a nat of the rinse station, but the ambient noise made it impossible to use. I took the camera to the mens room and recorded the sink running, and used it.

Not every photog can think of getting audio like this. If it doesn't get out of control, I think its fine to do in situations like this.
 

Horonto

Well-known member
I think producers should start writing realistic "teases" if we're talking about ethics.
 

TightShot

Well-known member
I have an ethics question for you: I am a female photographer who is a senior at a university majoring in mass comm. I have three years experience shooting and running lives. My station just hired a 19 year old kid with no experience and no schooling to be our weekend photog. He has been shooting for a month and a half, and still shoots on filter 2 with the shutter on or with the gain up in bright sunlight in mid-day.

This is the second male shooter with less experience hired after me at my station. BOth have been paid more money than I make.

Why is that?
 

Oldhuskie

Member
"still shoots on filter 2 with the shutter on or with the gain up in bright sunlight in mid-day."

I get the gain up but the shutter on filter 2 in the middle of the day should look great.

"This is the second male shooter with less experience hired after me at my station. BOth have been paid more money than I make."

Send a tape out. It sounds like they don't like you that much.

Why is that?
 

TightShot

Well-known member
"still shoots on filter 2 with the shutter on or with the gain up in bright sunlight in mid-day."

I get the gain up but the shutter on filter 2 in the middle of the day should look great.

"This is the second male shooter with less experience hired after me at my station. BOth have been paid more money than I make."

Send a tape out. It sounds like they don't like you that much.

Why is that?
I wouldn't say that. But I'm sure YOU would know, right? I bet your station LOVES you..especially your female co-workers. Sorry if I asked my peers for some honest feedback. I've been a member of this site for four years. No need to just insult and attack me, boys.
 

TightShot

Well-known member
you're a female.
I believe I stated that fact. Just because the societal norm is to f*ck women in pay in comparison to their male counterparts doesn't mean that it is acceptable or appropriate. But I guess this question would be better posed to members of the ACLU. Obviously I will get nothing but chauvinistic feedback here.
 

Rack Focus

Well-known member
Sweetheart, you sound like real pleasure to work with. Good luck with that ACLU idea. Let us know how that works out for ya.
 

Oldhuskie

Member
I wouldn't say that. But I'm sure YOU would know, right? I bet your station LOVES you..especially your female co-workers. Sorry if I asked my peers for some honest feedback. I've been a member of this site for four years. No need to just insult and attack me, boys.

It is honest feedback. There is a reason why they are bypassing you for others. I have no idea what it is but there is something there that they do not like. Send a tape out. By the way... I do get along with all the females in the newsroom.
 

Necktie Boy

Well-known member
Tightshot,

Well, a few did give you a few responses, and you were sort of hard on them? No job is fair. Someone will always get paid more or treated better. That is life. As pointed, being a female could be a reason. Is it fair? No Is it common? Yes I have read that still, men make more money than women working at the same position. You mention that you have there for three years? Did you burn some bridges with the Chief? Or with anyone else? You could be doing a very good job, but someone doesn't like that? Finally, it sounds that you may have a chip on your shoulder. I know that this isn't fair for me to judge you by your postings, but they were rude. Have you spoken to your Chief about getting a raise, or why the other males are getting more money that you are? Sometimes, talking will solve the problem.
It doesn't sound that you are happy at your work. Finish college. Create a great reel. Move to a better station that will treat you well.
 

bluffton

Well-known member
Tightshot,

My wife was a shooter when I met her and she had more talent than me. I made about 5K more than she did. Why? It really doesn't matter. Her goals were different and she didn't mind. However, I will let you know, whenever I feel I'm being given the short end of a stick, I broach the subject in a kind, gentle, professional manner with my supervisor. And if I don't get the result I like or there is no compromise, I send out tapes, DVD, emails, html or whatever gets me my next gig.

Stop comparing yourself to others. You are you in your situation. Nobody should know what you are making and you shouldn't know what any one else is earning. It doesn't matter. You made your deal and now you aren't happy with it. Have a discussion with you boss.

Good luck to you:)
 

GMoney

Member
I'm not sure why you are making less but that would be an issue I would raise with your news director or chief photographer. If the situation is exactly what you say it is then the higher ups need to give you a valid excuse or you have a reason to be ticked off. You need to go in to your boss with a good attitude and under no circumstances attack them but demand some answers. I still don't understand why you are attacking fellow photogs for shooting in filter 2 with the shutter on. I've been doing that for years and never had a problem with how the picture came out but to each their own.
 

smltm4nw

Active member
You just asked based on your description why you were making less and getting less respect. I can't speak to you, your co-workers, or the work environment. But I can honestly say the surface answer to your question is because your a female. Like everyone else has said if you don't like it leave. Especially if you are that much better then the other photogs you shouldn't have that hard of a time sticking it to the man.
 

TightShot

Well-known member
Sweetheart, you sound like real pleasure to work with.
As do you.


It is honest feedback. There is a reason why they are bypassing you for others. I have no idea what it is but there is something there that they do not like. Send a tape out. By the way... I do get along with all the females in the newsroom.
Again, you are insulting. They are not "bypassing" me. Why do you insist they do not like me? My ND and I have a good relationship. The reporters like to work with me. I get along with the other shop photog and my chief who are great shooters, far more experienced than I. No one here knows any more about this story than what I have written. More than one person has responded harping on about the "filter 2 with shutter on" example. Okay. How about this? For three weeks, every single thing he shot beyond a tight shot was utterly out of focus. Everything. He had no concept of the backfocus. We told him, he did not listen. Everything we teach him goes in one ear and out the other. I'm freaked that he's gonna kill himself the first time he attempts a live because he listens so poorly. Look. He's a nice enough kid. We get along. But he has broken equipment since he started. He disappears for hours at a time and he doesn't even know how to shoot properly yet. It just baffled me that ALL of this was overlooked for so long. Much of it came to a head when a fellow photographer exploded at this kid and this fellow photog gets angry MAYBE once a year. It takes a LOT to make him mad and he went off. Our ND finally took notice. I have to share gear with this kid and when I went out to the truck and opened the back end, the camera bag had tipped over and the camera had slid completely out and had been sliding around in the back end of the truck. I went to get my ND before I touched anything so that he could see how the kid treats equipment. Again, the kid is nice enough. He just doesn't respect the equipment or take care of it, doesn't respect or appreciate his job. I was out at a chase the other night and the photogs from the other station and the newspaper told me stories about him, saying he was complaining loudly to both the police PIO and the Air Force base PIO (on two separate occasions, at two different locations) about his pay and was wearing flip-flops at one of these shoots.

Tightshot,
You mention that you have there for three years? Did you burn some bridges with the Chief? Or with anyone else? You could be doing a very good job, but someone doesn't like that?...Have you spoken to your Chief about getting a raise, or why the other males are getting more money that you are?
I have been shooting for three years. I have been at this station for two. My chief had no say in hiring this kid or he wouldn't have hired him, those are his words. He DID have say in hiring me. My chief and I are a lot a like, hot-headed and quick-tempered. I respect him immensely and hope he still appreciates me as a photographer. As I said, he DID recruit me along with the Assignment Editor at the time. My chief has no say in our pay rate, either. That's our ND.

Stop comparing yourself to others. You are you in your situation. Nobody should know what you are making and you shouldn't know what any one else is earning.
I was referring to a single "other" shooter and if you see by my above response to OldHuskie, there's a good reason why it baffled me to learn that he made more than me, however little. And I didn't intentionally try to learn what he made. We share a vehicle and equipment. He left his pay stub in the truck. I picked it up to see if it was mine. I didn't intentionally find out what his pay was. Believe me, I would rather be blissfully ignorant of that fact.

If the situation is exactly what you say it is then the higher ups need to give you a valid excuse or you have a reason to be ticked off. You need to go in to your boss with a good attitude and under no circumstances attack them but demand some answers. I still don't understand why you are attacking fellow photogs for shooting in filter 2 with the shutter on. I've been doing that for years and never had a problem with how the picture came out but to each their own.
I tried talking to my ND. I could have done it better, but I was insulted. I had two days to cool off before I saw him and spoke with him about it.
As for the reference to shooting on filter 2 with the shutter on--that kid doesn't even know how to focus. He doesn't know what the shutter is for. And the gain was on in addition to the shutter being on. He didn't even know the shutter EXISTED. He doesn't know what it does. That's why it irritated me. There was a little exclamation point lit up in red inside the viewfinder and he didn't even question why. This was the least of the things I could have mentioned. I regret mentioning it. I should have elaborated. I should have said he couldn't focus for three weeks. That's a bit of an issue. Also, when he shoots things for reporters, they have to be re-shot by other photogs. Utterly un-useable.

Especially if you are that much better then the other photogs you shouldn't have that hard of a time sticking it to the man.
I ABSOLUTELY did NOT say that! I don't know why you guys are putting words in my mouth. There is ONE other person who earns money under the title "photog" who has no experience or any real knowledge and no interest in learning who is lax in his performance, lazy, and unappreciative who I do not respect as a photographer and who I am sure that I am more experienced than and a harder worker than. But I am sure that not one of you has ever met a lax shooter of whom you thought--when you saw their work--"how do they stay employed?"

Being confident in my own ability to shoot is not a fault. I am less experienced than two of the shooters in my newsroom and I respect their talents and learn from them daily. This kid isn't one of those. I am a better shooter than he. No matter how much I am attacked on here for being certain of this fact, I stand by that statement.

As for future action, I have likely prospects elsewhere. But I love my shop and my co-workers, even this inexperienced lax kid. I don't want to leave, but the other option offers quite a bit more per hour. Learning that this kid made more money than me was just the tipping point shove that's made me really have to consider leaving. And that hurts.

But having such a positive response from you all helps a lot.
 

Necktie Boy

Well-known member
Something doesn't add up? I believe in what you are saying. You get along with everyone in the shop. You did talk to the ND. What he said made sense, or did he dodge the questions that you asked? Do you believe what the Chief is saying? You have to remember that he is management and you are an employee. I cannot believe that he does have a hand in hiring the shooters? One of his responsibilities to select shooter that will meet the station's standards. He and the ND decide if he will fit in. Yes, there are occasions when the ND, Chief, and even the GM will hire someone without following the chain. But behinds closed doors, everything is told....Only to management. Is the new kid a family friend or even family? I have seen ringers working at small stations, later finding out that their dad is a big wig in the company or a company that does business with the station.

Example #1: At one station, I was hired by the Station Manager. Yes, he had seen my work and resume. He called me up and offered me a position without an interview. This was for a Creative Service Positions.

Example #2: I was somewhat in your situation. The new kid sucked. He broke equipment. He almost burn down the live truck. Chopped a few feet of the mast. He couldn't frame. He shot hot video 90% of the time. Any one of us would be fired, but he was the anchor's son. He was hired because he was the anchor's sons. He wasn't fired. In fact, he was given a better shift.....Mine!

Example #4: I did a good job. I always came back with useable footage and a sound bite. My live shots were very good and my reporters were getting good remarks. The main anchors would comment how good of a job I was doing over the IFB. Everyone heard. The ND and the Director of the newscast didn't like all the good stuff that was being said about me. They have been there for years! To get rid of me, I went to mornings, the beginner's shift. They knew that I couldn't work mornings. They got rid of me.

Yes, it's hard to leave a place that you enjoy working in. Even when a new kid that doesn't know what he is doing, but sometimes you have to step out. Saying no, or in this case, I quit isn't easy, and will never be when you have to.

It sound that you can stand tall against your co-workers. You know you stuff and are willing to get better! Some people don't like that.

Saying all that, again, something doesn't add up? Someone is not telling you the truth. And I believe you. So, that leaves management?
 
Top