December 18, 2006: On last week’s show, Michael and I talked about Yahoo’s news service, which solicits photographs and video from the public (citizen journalists) but doesn’t seem to offer any compensation. 

In other words, they make money off your images - you get fame.

Today’s Washington Post has a story about this trend of using images caught by regular folks:

GLASGOW, Scotland — At 2:42 p.m. on Oct. 11, Dean Collins heard a thunderous explosion as he worked at his computer in his 30th-floor apartment in Manhattan.

Collins looked out his window and saw a small plane crashing into a building right in front of him — the accident that killed New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle and his flight instructor. Instinctively, he recalled, he pulled his Fuji digital camera from a drawer and started shooting, thinking to himself, “This is going to be on the news.”

Collins, a consultant for a software company, said he remembered reading about Scoopt, a year-old agency in Scotland that brokers photos for “citizen journalists.” Within minutes, he had e-mailed his digital shots to Scoopt. Hours later, his picture of a smoking Manhattan high-rise was in three British newspapers, including a front-page splash in the Times of London. He earned $650 for his work.

The rapid rise of digital technology, which enables ordinary people almost anywhere to record images and post them quickly on the Internet, is changing the way the world witnesses history, not to mention the dependable misbehavior of celebrities. Events that once were recorded only by human memory may now endure in full, pixelated detail, available in seconds around the globe.

First of all, who knew that a picture that runs in three newspapers, including a front-page spread, only earns you $650?

And does this all seem kind of ghoulish? Do we really need to see all these pictures of plane crashes, muggings, and Kate Moss (allegedly) snorting cocaine?

Michael and I also talked about the potential for fakery once media outlets start depending on citizen-created images rather than those that come from photojournalists who have professional ethics and reputations to uphold. Sure enough, the article addresses that issue, too.

Verifying photos’ authenticity is always a concern. MacRae said he quizzes photographers about their shots to make sure they are what they seem to be. MacRae said he caught one faker who said he got a shot of Mary-Kate Olsen while hiding behind thick hedges — on a busy Manhattan street. Pressed by MacRae, the person admitted he had lifted the photo from the Internet and tried to pass it off as his own.

Many news agencies are leery of unsolicited photos that could have been altered or staged. Gillmor said one famous hoax purported to show a tourist posing at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, with a jetliner in the background about to smash into the tower. He said he recently rejected a photo that purported to show Cuban leader Fidel Castro dead in a coffin.

Hmmm…right after this, I think I’m opening up Photoshop and getting to work. How much do you think I could get for a photo of Mary-Kate and Castro making out…in a coffin?!

Scott xanax .5to adverse tramadol reactionsabout murmur tramadol all200mg tramadol2bxanax 2bmastercardaddiction xanax alcoholviagra usage amishxanax bars mg 1000 Map

This entry was posted on Monday, December 18th, 2006 at 8:08 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.