When to turn off the camera

Cornelio78

Cornelio78

Active member
Everyone has their breaking point or morals. When do you refuse to shoot? Or what are factors that you go by and say, OKAY I AM TURNING THE CAMERA OFF AND LEAVING.

Whether it is your standards/morals, or because you feel to threatened.

I have refused to shoot once. I believe a reporter wanted to go to a cemetery of someone who died to get shots. She was working with me that day and i said NO, I AM NOT SHOOTING THAT. She argued with me for a few minutes(which i will argue with any reporter) and then she just took another photog.

Then there have been times i have stopped shooting or just didnt shoot cause of the place i was at. I always feel bad going to a rural town where everyone knows each other and it is a shooting that took place. Especially when it is a child who got shot or accidental shooting. The most recent one i remember is i got to the area, their were cops on the scene, but they werent doing crown control or anything. Small town. I guess family members and neighbors were there. I didnt really know what was going on. Assignment editor just here accidental shooting in the small town and a address.

So i didnt take the easy approach and accidentally drove up upon on family, ect. needless to say they werent happy at my being there. I took the camera out just to shoot the area and they threatened to call the cops, to which i said, "Ma'am, i understand you want to do that, but i am well within my right to be here and to shoot, since this is public property, me being in the street." So she called and no one came out. In the end i didnt really shoot anything, cause the family was just to persistant. They kind of knew i had to shoot, but they just didnt want me too. To this day i still dont know what happened. I am guessing a kid shot himself or his parent shot himself in front of the kid, just going off of what the people said on the scene when they were telling me to leave.

I staked out a few blocks away for about 20 minutes, but nothing ever came of things.


Now i will, if asked, not shoot certain people, if asked by family or authorities. Unless of course said person is the perp.
 
Where I work, we don't cover accidental shootings unless it's a situation where a child got hold of a gun and accidentally shot themselves or someone else.
 
You might want to look into shooting sports or consumer or medical or anything but GA, which is often crime. It sounds like you don't have the stomach for it.
 
Ethics

tvguide said:
You might want to look into shooting sports or consumer or medical or anything but GA, which is often crime. It sounds like you don't have the stomach for it.
Click to expand...

That statement is just idiotic. There is nothing wrong with having a conscious. There is rarely a cut and dry answer to questions of ethics. The only advice I can give you is that if it goes against your personal ethical beliefs, consult your superior and explain your situation. Maybe they agree with you and you're right. Or, maybe they don't, and they get someone else to shoot it. But, at least, you don't go home feeling like a douche. There is no story that is worth further p!ssing off someone that is grieving a tragic loss. Every situation is different, but if your gut tells you not to, then don't. Or, at least, cool off and discuss it with an outside party.
 
NEWSSHOOTER3 said:
That statement is just idiotic. There is nothing wrong with having a conscious. There is rarely a cut and dry answer to questions of ethics. The only advice I can give you is that if it goes against your personal ethical beliefs, consult your superior and explain your situation. Maybe they agree with you and you're right. Or, maybe they don't, and they get someone else to shoot it. But, at least, you don't go home feeling like a douche. There is no story that is worth further p!ssing off someone that is grieving a tragic loss. Every situation is different, but if your gut tells you not to, then don't. Or, at least, cool off and discuss it with an outside party.
Click to expand...

That was why I originally left news, (besides the piss-poor wages,) So many stories made me feel like such a slimeball. The second time around it seems a lot easier to deal with, and I'm not sure that I like that notion.
 
I've never refused a shot as they've always been ay my discretion but I did refuse to edit a session once at TNN.
I use to edit the Life and Times shows. If you remember these, they are documentaries that are basicly video obituaries. In '98, Johnny Cash was in the hospital with double pneumonia and wasn't expected to make it through the weekend. This was Friday evening. We wrapped one project early and the producer mentioned he wanted to get started on Johny Cash's Life and Times piece so it could air just after his passing. I get the whole quick turn around thing but this felt like bad kharma to me... making an obit for a man not yet dead. It felt more like a capitolization of a death than a celebration of a life. I stated my point of view, offered to come in over the weekend should anything happen and the producer happily agreed.
The man in black went home soon after and knocked boots for years more.

In '01 I turned the Avid off mid session while being placed int he middle of legal hooha between the owners of the company I was staffing for. I started my own company and have been on my own since. No regrets in either case.
 
I shoot everything it's my job. I've had reporters tell me to not shoot that. I think after many years of shooting evrything I have no conscious. I'm numb to people dying. I've seen every way someone can die. Sure, some stories make me feel bad for the people that are effected but after many years and many tragedies it's the same story with different characters. It never seems real watching it through a camera. It depends on where you are and how you handle the story. Don't run up on scene. Give people some space for awhile. Slowly move closer to the event taking place. Blend in with the surroundings. Use your lens. Zoom into the scene. Use your tripod. Find the meaningful shot from a distance. Feel out the environment before jumping in the middle of the action. Capture what's happening but think what you are doing as you are doing it.
 
tvguide said:
You might want to look into shooting sports or consumer or medical or anything but GA, which is often crime. It sounds like you don't have the stomach for it.
Click to expand...

Dont have the stomach for it? All we cover is death and destruction and i have shoot almost all of it. But i can and will refuse to shoot something i dont see right in my own eyes.

1911A1 said:
Where I work, we don't cover accidental shootings unless it's a situation where a child got hold of a gun and accidentally shot themselves or someone else.
Click to expand...
We cover accidental shootings when it involves children for the most part. But we dont cover suicides.
 
Conscious a lot?

I like that we're talking about media ethics, but the second time that someone said that they had a 'conscious' at work, I have to stop this.

You're always conscious at work. That mean awake and alert of your surroundings.
Conscience means an ability to determine if personal actions are right or wrong.

Sorry to get all uppity on that, it was bugging me.
 
One of my human mic stands want me to roll tape as he interviewed a 6 year old about his mom getting shot. The kid happened to be playing in the front yard of the family home after the crime scene had cleared. There wasn't a parental unit around and he just wanted to talk to the kid. I refused. No way, no how. He caved.

Cheers, Mi3ke
KOB-TV
 
This is a very important topic, but I think there's some misunderstanding:

tvguide said:
You might want to look into shooting sports or consumer or medical or anything but GA, which is often crime. It sounds like you don't have the stomach for it.
Click to expand...

I don't think tvguide was trying to be a jerk about it. Some folks simply can't stomach some of the graphic stories they're sent to shoot. I've been to a number of stories where colleagues have been visibly upset, be it a heinous crime involving a child or the aftermath of a horrible accident.

There's nothing wrong with showing your human side. Some folks have an easier time suppressing their outward emotions during particularly disturbing stories. That doesn't mean they have less of a conscience! As mi3ke pointed out, they might sometimes need to be pulled back into reality.

Let me offer up an alternate way of looking at upsetting situations:

Above all, you're human. Of course you're going to feel disturbed when you're shooting a story about a child molester who stepped it up a few notches. As the medical examiner team is bringing covered bodies out of a basement landing on a gurney, you're going to feel like a complete asshole for shooting the incredibly sad situation. You're going to feel horrible when you have to knock on the door of a family whose kid was listed as missing up until a few hours ago. I wouldn't want to work with anyone who isn't showing emotion about a story like that.

Second to being human, you're a messenger. That's what journalism is. How many of you have done stories that caused you to go home and hug your kid?

Thousands of other parents hugged their kids that night, too, and it was because of your story.

The pessimistic of us will continue to think otherwise. That's their view.

What we do for a living is important. I can't help but wonder how many people are more careful, more observant and more diligent, and how many lives we inadvertently save because of our stories.
 
There's a difference between not shooting, and not airing.

Shoot it, and decide later whether it's ethical to run it. If you make that ethical call later and feel it's ok to run it and you have no video....

I never refuse to shoot anything, but there have been things I wouldn't air.
 
Chicago Dog said:
I don't think tvguide was trying to be a jerk about it. Some folks simply can't stomach some of the graphic stories they're sent to shoot. I've been to a number of stories where colleagues have been visibly upset, be it a heinous crime involving a child or the aftermath of a horrible accident.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
For everyone saying that they would never say no to a shoot, have you read mi3ke's example? Would anyone here agree to shoot that? I've got a pretty high tolerance in general, but I agree with him completely.
 
AKinDC said:
For everyone saying that they would never say no to a shoot, have you read mi3ke's example? Would anyone here agree to shoot that? I've got a pretty high tolerance in general, but I agree with him completely.
Click to expand...

I think the practice of shooting now and deciding later isn't necessarily bad, but carries a very specific danger. Once that media (tape, P2 card, disc, whatever) makes it back to the station, there's no telling where it will end up. You can write notes and stick Post-Its to it all you want, but odds are high someone's going to wonder why you didn't use "that great video" and put it to air themselves.

Exercising some form of judgement in the field is a necessity in more than one way.
 
I had a similar experience to mi3ke's example, although no one died, so not as extreme. We were covering a story about kids setting of muradic acid/tin foil bombs. The reporter wanted to interview some kids next door, and it was obvious there were no parents around.

I had recently attended an NPPA ethics seminar about a station losing a lawsuit after interviewing kids without parental permission, and THAT station never aired the footage and still lost the lawsuit. I explained this to the reporter. We got into a heated discussion, and wound up calling the EP. I was surprised that the EP backed the reporter, because she was one of the more ethical people in our newsroom. Since I respected her, I went back and did the shoot, but I still feel it was wrong.
 
After years of shooting GA news, you do become numb to a lot of things that would probably disturb "normal" people. I've been to my share of gruesome murders and horrific car accidents.

The only story that ever really got to me was one of the first bad car accidents I was sent to when I first started shooting news. It was an SUV that flipped and rolled about 15 feet down an embankment. Just out of pure dumb luck, I was literally two miles away from the scene when it hit the scanners. I got there as emergency vehicles were arriving. There was an elderly woman trapped hanging upside down in the driver's seat.

Just as I starting shooting, a younger woman ran straight at me yelling frantically "That's my mother in there! You heartless bastard! Don't you do this you bastard!!!" (Trust me when I say she yelled much more graphic things as well, but you get the point.) She proceeded to grab the camera and try to jerk it right off the tripod. I had to yell to an officer to get her away from me. He came over and restrained this woman as she then just broke down into a gut-wrenching crying state.

I know I was just doing my job, but this seriously affected me. Looking back at the whole incident the only thing I would have done differently is not get so close, I was only about 20 feet from the vehicle. But I guess the combination of being a rookie and getting caught up in the adrenaline rush of getting on scene so quickly clouded my judgement.
 
There's ethics, and then there's empathy and respect as well.

Next time you do a door-knock, how about approaching the home without your camera, simply introduce yourselves and actually care about who you're interviewing instead of just sticking a mic in their face, "HOW DO YOU FEEL?" Take some time to address their emotions instead of just looking for clips. Put yourselves in their shoes, treat them like you would like to be treated in that situation. And FWIW, I'd kick you in the nuts too if tragedy hit someone I knew and you come up to me to ask, "how do I feel."

Then again, North American news is quite tame compared to the rabid stuff overseas, where cameraguys are known to follow stretchers right into the ER operating room.
 
Funny

AlexLucas said:
I like that we're talking about media ethics, but the second time that someone said that they had a 'conscious' at work, I have to stop this.

You're always conscious at work. That mean awake and alert of your surroundings.
Conscience means an ability to determine if personal actions are right or wrong.

Sorry to get all uppity on that, it was bugging me.
Click to expand...

Some of the worst spellers (as well as grammatically challenged) post on this forum.
Dosn't anywon has spel-czek? How 'bout the Little Brown Handbook?

Don't be sorry Lucas. You are not alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top