It's the Sun-Times. They're a pretty good paper on certain topics, but at the same time they are sort of a joke in Chicago. And that's sort of how I feel about this move. It's a move in the right direction, but at the same time I shake my head in disbelief that all their pictures are now going to be taken with reporters with iPhones.
There is a lot more to photography than what equipment you use. Firing trained professionals is obviously just a way to not have to pay them. Handing out cameras to the remaining staff is only done because the newspaper can't get away with not having pictures and it's cheaper than hiring freelancers or licensing or w/e.
I agree, and the more I think about it the more I think this is a dumb move, which will only hasten the demise of newspapers as we know them. I can get cutting dslr's. But expensive cameras don't generate great images, skilled photographers do. That's really what they got rid of.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH UBW Sharuum BR Olivia Voldaren UR Jhoira URG Riku U Vendilion Clique
the sun times was awful, and now it is awful ... er. this is why newspapers are dying.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
my mouth is full of winsome lies -
and eyes are full of death besides
but luckily the soul is wise -
it sees beyond my blindness and
forced failure makes a better guise,
so as i come again alive,
it feels like life's a decent plan
As a journalism major, this doesn't surprise me at all. We are constantly being told that just being able to write isn't enough anymore, as more and more places are expecting you to be able to take pictures, blog, and post to Youtube and various social media sites.
if it's anything like your party's Fox News, I'll take the criticism as legitimate. otherwise, keep this **** out of the thread thanks.
that's really stupid that they're ditching actual photographers for a training course on how to use a ****ty cellphone's ****ty camera though. good photos tell a story, grainy cellphone cam crap just makes you a joke.
Take your monoblack deck, then set aside 14 swamps. Add 4 Creeping Tar Pits, 4 Darkslick Shores, 4 Drowned Catacombs, and 2 Jwar isle Refuge and add 4 Jace, the Mindsculptors. Your monoblack deck is instantly better. Better yet, drop those refuges, throw in some islands and some mana leaks, and lo and behold, you're now playing a real deck. Congratulations. Welcome to the world of competitive M:TG.
I'm calling BS on this one. Iphone camera's are good for casual users but for journalism, no way. I refuse to believe the Tribune to be this stupid. If this news is real, then it serves them right to be in financial trouble.
This is clearly a move birthed out of desperation.
There's a lot more to photojournalism than being on the scene and having something to take pictures with. Great journalistic photographs require the training to capture the environment, the skill to recognize what will look good in a photograph, the time to take several or dozens of photographs in order to get the right one, and above all, a certain level of innate talent. You can't replace that with a writer and a smartphone.
In an era where everyone has an iPhone and a camera with them, what does the Sun-Times think it's adding to the conversation by having its reporters do the same thing? What newspapers should be marketing themselves on is their quality, their importance--maybe that's too expensive, but the way to convince people to buy your product isn't to make it more mediocre.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
I'm calling BS on this one. Iphone camera's are good for casual users but for journalism, no way. I refuse to believe the Tribune to be this stupid. If this news is real, then it serves them right to be in financial trouble.
A quick google search reveals that this is no hoax.
This is clearly a move birthed out of desperation.
There's a lot more to photojournalism than being on the scene and having something to take pictures with. Great journalistic photographs require the training to capture the environment, the skill to recognize what will look good in a photograph, the time to take several or dozens of photographs in order to get the right one, and above all, a certain level of innate talent. You can't replace that with a writer and a smartphone.
As photographers say: Give a good photographer a crappy camera, and he'll still get good photos. Give a bad photographer a great camera, and he'll still take crappy photos.
Give untrained amateurs cell phone cameras, and...lol
There are common innovations, there are crazy innovations, and then there's this.
This... This is just moronic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
There is a lot more to photography than what equipment you use. Firing trained professionals is obviously just a way to not have to pay them. Handing out cameras to the remaining staff is only done because the newspaper can't get away with not having pictures and it's cheaper than hiring freelancers or licensing or w/e.
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
Am I the only one going to applaud the technological transition?
A large volume of news, especially breaking news, is already overwhelmingly snapped/recorded with smartphones because they are the only convenient photo capturing devices at the time. No one has complained about these smartphone images' quality when appearing on news media.
The only news DSLRs and heavy camera equipment is good for capturing are orderly, composed, and largely uneventful news and what use is it that we see Mariah Carey at the Grammys in crystal clear 1080p when they're going to airbrush her zits, anyway? Not to mention the tech investment on news not many people read.
My only qualm with the Chicago Sun Times is their smartphone selection. iPhone 5? I think they should wait to see what iPhone 5s brings or maybe equip journalists with a more capable smartphone camera like the upcoming Nokia EOS smartphone. But, overall, the transition to smartphones make sense.
Am I the only one going to applaud the technological transition?
A large volume of news, especially breaking news, is already overwhelmingly snapped/recorded with smartphones because they are the only convenient photo capturing devices at the time. No one has complained about these smartphone images' quality when appearing on news media.
The only news DSLRs and heavy camera equipment is good for capturing are orderly, composed, and largely uneventful news and what use is it that we see Mariah Carey at the Grammys in crystal clear 1080p when they're going to airbrush her zits, anyway? Not to mention the tech investment on news not many people read.
My only qualm with the Chicago Sun Times is their smartphone selection. iPhone 5? I think they should wait to see what iPhone 5s brings or maybe equip journalists with a more capable smartphone camera like the upcoming Nokia EOS smartphone. But, overall, the transition to smartphones make sense.
Only one of these is journalism. Only one of these sticks with you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
A large volume of news, especially breaking news, is already overwhelmingly snapped/recorded with smartphones because they are the only convenient photo capturing devices at the time. No one has complained about these smartphone images' quality when appearing on news media.
The difference in quality between a smartphone picture and a good DSLR in the hands of a professional is noticeable. This move is a desperation move to attempt to replace quality with quantity.
9 times out of 10 the first people on the scene are not going to be professional reporters. The only reason a lot of breaking news pictures are taken on smartphones is because that's the only thing an amateur has on them. Even then, the sheer volume of pictures means that one or two good photos will be useable.
No photographer with any self respect is going to primarily shoot pictures on a smart phone because a good digital camera can do significantly more than a smartphone.
Would you like to zoom in from a distance or get an ultra closeup?
Would you like to color balance your photo?
Would you like to adjust your camera's ISO and Shutter speed?
That's just three scenarios off the top of my head.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Am I the only one going to applaud the technological transition?
A large volume of news, especially breaking news, is already overwhelmingly snapped/recorded with smartphones because they are the only convenient photo capturing devices at the time. No one has complained about these smartphone images' quality when appearing on news media.
The only news DSLRs and heavy camera equipment is good for capturing are orderly, composed, and largely uneventful news and what use is it that we see Mariah Carey at the Grammys in crystal clear 1080p when they're going to airbrush her zits, anyway? Not to mention the tech investment on news not many people read.
My only qualm with the Chicago Sun Times is their smartphone selection. iPhone 5? I think they should wait to see what iPhone 5s brings or maybe equip journalists with a more capable smartphone camera like the upcoming Nokia EOS smartphone. But, overall, the transition to smartphones make sense.
Yes, a lot of breaking news is captured via smartphone, as you said, b/c that's is what is on-hand at the time. But, this article isn't talking about amateurs on the street; its talking about actual journalists. If a journalist isn't where the action is, it doesn't matter if he has a DSLR or a smartphone, he isn't getting the shot. If the journalist in question arrives at the scene of a news event, why not bring a proper camera? More to the point, why not pay someone who actually understands photography to take the photos, so that the journalist can actually focus on interviews/telling the story?
That's the main beef I have with this decision: the assumption that anyone can take great photos with minimal training.
Also: Why would you say that DSLR's are only good for orderly, composed events? That doesn't make sense to me. DSLR's, especially those used by news organizations, are absolute tanks, designed to be used in all manner of conditions. DSLR's, especially those used by news organizations, are designed to effectively capture fleeting events. Among other things, they:
1) Have incredibly faster autofocus. There isn't remotely a comparison here.
2) Have the option to manual focus, which ironically is hugely valuable for certain types of photojournalism.
3) Shoot faster. In a chaotic environment, and don't want to miss a shot? You could whip out your iphone and tap to focus/shoot, getting one shot every second or so (if you're lucky). Or, you could just hold down your shutter button on a DSLR, at 14 photos/second.
3) Have superior ISO/Noise reduction abilities. Is your chaotic environment also dark? Your iphone will either produce blurry photos, or it will net you photos that aren't blurry, but suffer in image quality from high ISO noise.
All that said, I do agree that there are circumstances where a news story doesn't really merit the capabilities of a skilled photographer/DSLR, like a community event or even a press conference. That doesn't mean cutting your entire photo staff is a smart idea.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH UBW Sharuum BR Olivia Voldaren UR Jhoira URG Riku U Vendilion Clique
No photographer with any self respect is going to primarily shoot pictures on a smart phone because a good digital camera can do significantly more than a smartphone.
You make valid points about the quality difference between smartphones and DSLRs; however, from a pragmatic perspective, the Chicago Sun-Times is not concerned with photo artistry. We're talking about a newspaper and not an art gallery. The readers aren't going to carefully scrutinize each photo and say "The lighting on this photo is nice!" or "Ooooohhhh... this photo belongs in a museum!"
The Chicago Sun-Times doesn't need or want photographers with "self respect". As a matter of fact, it turns out it doesn't need or want photographers at all; which, is wholly appropriate for the intents and purposes of its product. It's not so much a matter of smartphones becoming a replacement for DSLRs so much as they are "good enough" in this particular circumstance.
I'd like to end by making a note that the Chicago Sun-Times likely had tested iPhones as camera replacements before making this decision. These guys know what they're doing! So reserve judgment before seeing the final product.
I'd like to end by making a note that the Chicago Sun-Times likely had tested iPhones as camera replacements before making this decision. These guys know what they're doing! So reserve judgment before seeing the final product.
If you really think that this is a move based on a sincere belief that the photographs of untrained journalists with iPhones will be just as good as those of trained photographers with professional cameras, I have a dying industry to sell you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
Only one of these is journalism. Only one of these sticks with you.
I agree with the first point but not the second. I find any kind of video of someone dying to be very disturbing and anyone I've ever seen always sticks with me. And not in a good way, which is why I avoid them as much as possible.
But you're absolutely right about it not being journalism. It sticks with you for a very different reason than pictures like the one you posted. That picture is thought provoking and, for me anyway, makes you deeply consider why things happen and why things can go so wrong sometimes and what can be done to change it. I think the videos stick with people because they are disturbing and it's hard to get that kind of image out of your head. There is nothing thought provoking about snuff videos.
Real journalism needs talented and experience photographers. Reporters with iphones are not going to get these kinds of images.
You make valid points about the quality difference between smartphones and DSLRs; however, from a pragmatic perspective, the Chicago Sun-Times is not concerned with photo artistry. We're talking about a newspaper and not an art gallery. The readers aren't going to carefully scrutinize each photo and say "The lighting on this photo is nice!" or "Ooooohhhh... this photo belongs in a museum!"
The Chicago Sun-Times doesn't need or want photographers with "self respect". As a matter of fact, it turns out it doesn't need or want photographers at all; which, is wholly appropriate for the intents and purposes of its product. It's not so much a matter of smartphones becoming a replacement for DSLRs so much as they are "good enough" in this particular circumstance.
I'd like to end by making a note that the Chicago Sun-Times likely had tested iPhones as camera replacements before making this decision. These guys know what they're doing! So reserve judgment before seeing the final product.
Who at the Sun-Times do you think would have been qualified to test iphones as camera replacements? My first guess would be their photo staff...
As for newspaper photos not being art...I think the lines between the two blur much, much more than you realize.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH UBW Sharuum BR Olivia Voldaren UR Jhoira URG Riku U Vendilion Clique
You underestimate the impact that good photography has. It's unlikely that an organisation that doesn't value such a powerful (and relevant! they sell something known for pictures ffs) art form is going to be able to keep much in the way of integrity in journalism, if they ever had it.
Art is not integrity. The concept of "art" can never be reconciled with "integrity" and it certainly has no place in "journalism" when it comes down to its most core tenets. (Have you ever taken a journalism class? You're supposed to use the most neutral everything as possible.)
If the amateur pictures are drab and unemotionally provoking, then the news event was drab and unemotionally provoking. Not everything is a great news story. While photographers take great photos, they will never possess the integrity of an amateur. You have to remember the news event is NOT about the experience of an outside photographer coming into a community. It was always about the participants of the event, the bystanders.
Professional photographers engineering a beautiful, tear wrenching moment is "yellow journalism" by its very definition. Now pretty pictures sell newspapers; but, it has nothing to do with what participants of the event actually experienced. If by preserving the "integrity of journalism" you are speaking of the lack of integrity of journalism and its historical deviance from the tenets of journalism taught in schools, however, then you are correct. Journalism is losing its integrity.
Who at the Sun-Times do you think would have been qualified to test iphones as camera replacements? My first guess would be their photo staff...
Ideally, a non-photographer journalist who underwent the pilot iPhone photography training program, an actual photographer, and a consumer focus panel to judge the final product; but, I realize that corporations are not always as careful with their decisions as you'd think them to be. Still, it's wrong to assume by default there was no testing considering that that would not be standard practice for such a major decision either.
Art is not integrity. The concept of "art" can never be reconciled with "integrity" and it certainly has no place in "journalism" when it comes down to its most core tenets. (Have you ever taken a journalism class? You're supposed to use the most neutral everything as possible.)
This I can see.
If the amateur pictures are drab and unemotionally provoking, then the news event was drab and unemotionally provoking.
This I can't. Proper framing and lighting is essential to a photograph and it can be royally messed up if you don't know what you're doing. This isn't about creating stories out of nothing; it's about capturing the stories that are there. If there were no writers, nobody would discover the stories they're writing about - they are reporting the story by their framing of the facts, and while they're trying to be as neutral as possible they are still presenting it to another person.
Not everything is a great news story. While photographers take great photos, they will never possess the integrity of an amateur.
We may as well only have newspapers composed of free blogs and iReports. Integrity is one thing, but accessibility is another, and the news is supposed to disseminate important information to the people. [What is 'important information'? We hope our journalists are as unbiased as possible ...] Without people who are good at tha,t though, it doesn't work.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
my mouth is full of winsome lies -
and eyes are full of death besides
but luckily the soul is wise -
it sees beyond my blindness and
forced failure makes a better guise,
so as i come again alive,
it feels like life's a decent plan
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/121445-chicago-newspaper-believes-iphone-now-better-than-dslr-fires-entire-photography-staff
UBW Sharuum
BR Olivia Voldaren
UR Jhoira
URG Riku
U Vendilion Clique
I agree, and the more I think about it the more I think this is a dumb move, which will only hasten the demise of newspapers as we know them. I can get cutting dslr's. But expensive cameras don't generate great images, skilled photographers do. That's really what they got rid of.
UBW Sharuum
BR Olivia Voldaren
UR Jhoira
URG Riku
U Vendilion Clique
and eyes are full of death besides
but luckily the soul is wise -
it sees beyond my blindness and
forced failure makes a better guise,
so as i come again alive,
it feels like life's a decent plan
if it's anything like your party's Fox News, I'll take the criticism as legitimate. otherwise, keep this **** out of the thread thanks.
that's really stupid that they're ditching actual photographers for a training course on how to use a ****ty cellphone's ****ty camera though. good photos tell a story, grainy cellphone cam crap just makes you a joke.
There's a lot more to photojournalism than being on the scene and having something to take pictures with. Great journalistic photographs require the training to capture the environment, the skill to recognize what will look good in a photograph, the time to take several or dozens of photographs in order to get the right one, and above all, a certain level of innate talent. You can't replace that with a writer and a smartphone.
In an era where everyone has an iPhone and a camera with them, what does the Sun-Times think it's adding to the conversation by having its reporters do the same thing? What newspapers should be marketing themselves on is their quality, their importance--maybe that's too expensive, but the way to convince people to buy your product isn't to make it more mediocre.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
A quick google search reveals that this is no hoax.
Here's Forbes take on it all:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/03/this-might-not-work-chicago-sun-times-fires-all-its-photographers-to-replace-them-with-iphones/
And here's an article about the laid off photographers, including a CNN interview with one of the photographers.
http://petapixel.com/2013/06/03/chicago-sun-times-photographers-react-and-respond-to-being-laid-off/
As photographers say: Give a good photographer a crappy camera, and he'll still get good photos. Give a bad photographer a great camera, and he'll still take crappy photos.
Give untrained amateurs cell phone cameras, and...lol
UBW Sharuum
BR Olivia Voldaren
UR Jhoira
URG Riku
U Vendilion Clique
This... This is just moronic.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Photography is an art.
That said, I love watching print media whine about their waning relevance.
John, part of the meme generation
On phasing:
A large volume of news, especially breaking news, is already overwhelmingly snapped/recorded with smartphones because they are the only convenient photo capturing devices at the time. No one has complained about these smartphone images' quality when appearing on news media.
The only news DSLRs and heavy camera equipment is good for capturing are orderly, composed, and largely uneventful news and what use is it that we see Mariah Carey at the Grammys in crystal clear 1080p when they're going to airbrush her zits, anyway? Not to mention the tech investment on news not many people read.
My only qualm with the Chicago Sun Times is their smartphone selection. iPhone 5? I think they should wait to see what iPhone 5s brings or maybe equip journalists with a more capable smartphone camera like the upcoming Nokia EOS smartphone. But, overall, the transition to smartphones make sense.
The famous photo of the execution of Nguyen Ngoc Loan
The video of the execution of Moammar Qaddafi
Only one of these is journalism. Only one of these sticks with you.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
The difference in quality between a smartphone picture and a good DSLR in the hands of a professional is noticeable. This move is a desperation move to attempt to replace quality with quantity.
9 times out of 10 the first people on the scene are not going to be professional reporters. The only reason a lot of breaking news pictures are taken on smartphones is because that's the only thing an amateur has on them. Even then, the sheer volume of pictures means that one or two good photos will be useable.
No photographer with any self respect is going to primarily shoot pictures on a smart phone because a good digital camera can do significantly more than a smartphone.
Would you like to zoom in from a distance or get an ultra closeup?
Would you like to color balance your photo?
Would you like to adjust your camera's ISO and Shutter speed?
That's just three scenarios off the top of my head.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Yes, a lot of breaking news is captured via smartphone, as you said, b/c that's is what is on-hand at the time. But, this article isn't talking about amateurs on the street; its talking about actual journalists. If a journalist isn't where the action is, it doesn't matter if he has a DSLR or a smartphone, he isn't getting the shot. If the journalist in question arrives at the scene of a news event, why not bring a proper camera? More to the point, why not pay someone who actually understands photography to take the photos, so that the journalist can actually focus on interviews/telling the story?
That's the main beef I have with this decision: the assumption that anyone can take great photos with minimal training.
Also: Why would you say that DSLR's are only good for orderly, composed events? That doesn't make sense to me. DSLR's, especially those used by news organizations, are absolute tanks, designed to be used in all manner of conditions. DSLR's, especially those used by news organizations, are designed to effectively capture fleeting events. Among other things, they:
1) Have incredibly faster autofocus. There isn't remotely a comparison here.
2) Have the option to manual focus, which ironically is hugely valuable for certain types of photojournalism.
3) Shoot faster. In a chaotic environment, and don't want to miss a shot? You could whip out your iphone and tap to focus/shoot, getting one shot every second or so (if you're lucky). Or, you could just hold down your shutter button on a DSLR, at 14 photos/second.
3) Have superior ISO/Noise reduction abilities. Is your chaotic environment also dark? Your iphone will either produce blurry photos, or it will net you photos that aren't blurry, but suffer in image quality from high ISO noise.
All that said, I do agree that there are circumstances where a news story doesn't really merit the capabilities of a skilled photographer/DSLR, like a community event or even a press conference. That doesn't mean cutting your entire photo staff is a smart idea.
UBW Sharuum
BR Olivia Voldaren
UR Jhoira
URG Riku
U Vendilion Clique
The Chicago Sun-Times doesn't need or want photographers with "self respect". As a matter of fact, it turns out it doesn't need or want photographers at all; which, is wholly appropriate for the intents and purposes of its product. It's not so much a matter of smartphones becoming a replacement for DSLRs so much as they are "good enough" in this particular circumstance.
I'd like to end by making a note that the Chicago Sun-Times likely had tested iPhones as camera replacements before making this decision. These guys know what they're doing! So reserve judgment before seeing the final product.
If you really think that this is a move based on a sincere belief that the photographs of untrained journalists with iPhones will be just as good as those of trained photographers with professional cameras, I have a dying industry to sell you.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
I agree with the first point but not the second. I find any kind of video of someone dying to be very disturbing and anyone I've ever seen always sticks with me. And not in a good way, which is why I avoid them as much as possible.
But you're absolutely right about it not being journalism. It sticks with you for a very different reason than pictures like the one you posted. That picture is thought provoking and, for me anyway, makes you deeply consider why things happen and why things can go so wrong sometimes and what can be done to change it. I think the videos stick with people because they are disturbing and it's hard to get that kind of image out of your head. There is nothing thought provoking about snuff videos.
Real journalism needs talented and experience photographers. Reporters with iphones are not going to get these kinds of images.
Who at the Sun-Times do you think would have been qualified to test iphones as camera replacements? My first guess would be their photo staff...
As for newspaper photos not being art...I think the lines between the two blur much, much more than you realize.
UBW Sharuum
BR Olivia Voldaren
UR Jhoira
URG Riku
U Vendilion Clique
If the amateur pictures are drab and unemotionally provoking, then the news event was drab and unemotionally provoking. Not everything is a great news story. While photographers take great photos, they will never possess the integrity of an amateur. You have to remember the news event is NOT about the experience of an outside photographer coming into a community. It was always about the participants of the event, the bystanders.
Professional photographers engineering a beautiful, tear wrenching moment is "yellow journalism" by its very definition. Now pretty pictures sell newspapers; but, it has nothing to do with what participants of the event actually experienced. If by preserving the "integrity of journalism" you are speaking of the lack of integrity of journalism and its historical deviance from the tenets of journalism taught in schools, however, then you are correct. Journalism is losing its integrity.
Ideally, a non-photographer journalist who underwent the pilot iPhone photography training program, an actual photographer, and a consumer focus panel to judge the final product; but, I realize that corporations are not always as careful with their decisions as you'd think them to be. Still, it's wrong to assume by default there was no testing considering that that would not be standard practice for such a major decision either.
This I can see.
This I can't. Proper framing and lighting is essential to a photograph and it can be royally messed up if you don't know what you're doing. This isn't about creating stories out of nothing; it's about capturing the stories that are there. If there were no writers, nobody would discover the stories they're writing about - they are reporting the story by their framing of the facts, and while they're trying to be as neutral as possible they are still presenting it to another person.
We may as well only have newspapers composed of free blogs and iReports. Integrity is one thing, but accessibility is another, and the news is supposed to disseminate important information to the people. [What is 'important information'? We hope our journalists are as unbiased as possible ...] Without people who are good at tha,t though, it doesn't work.
and eyes are full of death besides
but luckily the soul is wise -
it sees beyond my blindness and
forced failure makes a better guise,
so as i come again alive,
it feels like life's a decent plan
To which we must obviously shout in unison
Madness? THIS IS SPARTA!!!
Currently offering 2 non-foil Kolighan's Command for a Date Stamped foil!
convert bulk into good cards? PucaTrade - https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/21195
Ebay - decks/Promos/DVDs
Trade thread (constantly updated)
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/trading-post/details/337-pokerbob1s-casual-trading-emporium