Controversial Images- Comments on the AP Photo about the Dying Marine

The AP photo of a wounded marine taken on Sept.4 caused a controversy. Please see some comments here: http://www.eandppub.com/2009/09/ap-photo-of-afghan-death-that-is-causing-controversy.html
We are back to the war photos of Robert Capa.
I think that we should look at all sides- the photographer's decision to take the photograph and the media outlet's decision to publish the photo (what photos did the media outlet choose not to publish before- photos of the coffins being brought back, photos about the Danish Muslim cartoons. Did that particular media outlet represent issues such as abortion, war etc from all perspectives?). One of the criticisms against the photographer, Julie Jacobson is that she was not "patriotic" when she took the photos. Since when does a journalist or photojournalist has to be patriotic to represent the truth?
You can read her view about publishing this photo here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/06/dying-marine-fury-america-afghanistan
She said she wanted to portray the reality of the war. I think this should be a photographer or photojournalist's main concern: to show the real world and tell the truth. If Jacobson takes this this approach on all her photos, she is a REAL photographer.
I agree, taking pictures of dying and suffering people has been a controversial issue since Robert Capa’s time. But I would never agree to distort the reality and imply the war does not claim American casualties. After reading the article mentioned above, I also could read about the photographer’s intentions for taking the picture.
I believe, sometimes journalists have to put informing the public before anything else. Let's not forget, her purpose was to remind the tragedies of the war. So that the public does not forget the price Americans paid for freedom. Whether one agrees with the war the public has to know there are consequences. And they have the right to do something against it if they don't like it. For me, the image symbolizes the power of a photographer who dared to speak out and dared to show the other side of the war. A side that other media outlets avoid (see the controversy the images of the coffins has caused).
And by the way, the article does not mention the trauma of the photographers who shoot pictures of dead people, hungry kids, and sick old people?

How to be a bad journalist and a bad professor

I don't want to whine anymore about my English language skills. Once and for all, I am here to stay and WILL work in the U.S. media. Yes, I am a foreigner, but I don't want to hear over and over that my writing sucks and I have an accent!!! I am done with this crap. I want to hear HOW CAN I IMPROVE (besides telling me continuously to read the papers- I am doing that already, thank you very much). PLEASE tell me how can I improve, why my writing sucks. Talk to me about my bad grammar; don't just tell me I SUCK as a journalist. That is not a good method to improve someone at all. I am more than happy to get critics if they are CRITICAL. If you can't do that,stop, because you are wasting my time.

Alternative Story Forms (ASFs)

Since I am a newbie in multimedia and journalism in the U.S. I decided to start this blog and post questions on other blogs. I am more than happy to share the knowledge I gained today using a Poynter course called Beyond the Inverted Pyramid. ASFs are Questions and Answers, checklists, timelines and games. They are complete stories that provide more information to the main story, place the story into context. What is the difference between the main story and an ASF? An ASF is short (bite-size), and hopefully engages the reader to interact, gain knowledge, read the main story (it grabs the reader’s attention). According to the Eye Track Study by Poynter, the reader pays more attention to the ASFs. I am curious to see how ASFs will evolve in the future in online media.

Objective Journalism- Scattered dreams?

Yesterday in media class we discussed about the objectivity of journalism. I don’t believe in objective journalism because I have never seen one. I respect those who have this view, however. Here is why I don’t believe in objective journalism. First, a journalist’s role is to inform the public. You can’t just “state the facts”, but you have to make them digestible for the public by explaining, describing and even defining certain phenomena. By providing your definitions to the readers, you implicitly become less objective (unless you provide definitions from a dictionary) because we filter definitions through our own system of thinking.
Second, even with the selection of news (what is front page news, what is newsworthy at all for the journalists, editors, the public) is subjective.
I still believe that every journalist should aspire to be objective, however, this is not a norm (I don’t think it ever was) but every journalist should aspire to be objective.