soldiers or any human beings for that matter to SELL YOUR SOUL for a pittance!!! The AP and the oldstream media as a whole are ghoulish and disgusting and they hurt families in their rush to MAKE the news instead of the just telling the truth and the stories without an AGENDA! There INDEED MUST be a consequence for this pathetic excuse of a “news” organization!

When I saw this story earlier today, I was enraged. You have done an excellent write-up on it Erick. Recommended and tweeted.

to be more despicable than Reuters. I was mistaken.

and here is to the continued demise of the ever-hated AP’s pseudojournalism.

Best regards, Erick

---

Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots

Erick

I’m all for a boycott of anyone using AP’s news products, or a massive letter writing campaign directed towards the AP’s board of directors.

This is wrong from so many levels that something or someone must do something to AP for this outrage.

because he lifted the restrictions, as the diary notes, back in February.

What could be the motivation for Big BRObama to let such pictures be used?

To demoralize our troops? To hope that anti-war sentiment will grow, giving him no choice but to cut and run?

Remember that we have a crypto-pacifist as commander-in-chief!

Hell, someone will probably nominate the embed for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The AP ceased to be a credible journalistic organization a long time ago. They are little more than left wing operatives. Of course they should not be allowed to be with the troops, ever.

The military would be wise to more closely assess the left wing wolves calling themselves journalists it allows with the troops. Their propaganda is very damaging to us all.

This is well beyond the pale of “tasteful” and any attempt to portray it is otherwise is disingenuous.

There was a time when the press was a neutral observer to the experiences of our nation. A time when they could be somewhat trusted to honestly portray events from a neutral, politically unencumbered perspective. That required sound judgment and careful reflection regarding the words and pictures used to describe events. After all, isn’t that part of the so-called “art” and professionalism of journalists?

This is nothing but stooping to the lowest common denominator, without thoughtful reflection or professional interruption. They have betrayed the trust placed in them by our nation and in this case, our military. They have allowed political pretext as a substitute for judgment- despicable.

Mu thoughts and prayers go out to Corporal Bernard’s family.

Well, won’t this apply to obozo too – he is sending soldiers to Afghanistan death traps. Showing their pictures will remind everyone that obozo, the usurper, is literally ‘killing’ our soldiers himself for he has no legitimate CIC authority to command the soldiers!

ghouls and hyenas who feast on the suffering of others in order to feed themselves. Bad enough to shove a microphone in the face of someone who has just lost their house to a fire or tornado, or in the face of someone who has just lost a family member. But to portray the very image of a suffering and fatally wounded warrior is so perverted as to be evil.

They finally got what they wanted from this president that they couldn’t get from the last one– permission to defile the deaths of our troops. Obama owns this, I give him full credit.

that I heartily disagree with the take on this offered in the diary and many of the responses.

While I have the utmost sympathy for the family of the soldier in the picture and understand their reluctance to see the photo in the public domain I can’t agree that it is insensitive or unconscionable to print it.

We have so far seen many pictures of injured, dying and dead civilians in the Iraq and Afghan conflicts. It seems that there is no objection to those. Why, then, is there an objection to seeing the image of a soldier that is acting in our names?

Historically we have always seen the horrors of war depicted in the media – there are even pictures of the dead and dying in the Civil War. Why do we shrink from seeing the reality of the conflicts being waged in our names in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Why is it unacceptable to see our soldiers but not civilians? Can we not face the consequences of our collective actions? Can we not look at what we ask our soldiers to face and possibly suffer?

A soldier involved in a conflict is not a private citizen but is acting as the physical embodiment of government policy and as a surrogate for those civilians at home. As such – his/her actions are in the public domain and are rightly subject to scrutiny. Why should we balk at seeing the reality of asking them to put their lives on the line on our behalf?

I’m surprised at the reaction from a community that regularly asserts its support for the military.

Who took the picture and what Marine outfit is he currently assigned to?
The members of L/Cpl Bernard’s Platoon have every right to know who took the photo and who is responsible for distributing it. Maybe Bernard’s Company Commander will see that a picture of the embedded photographer is posted on every bulletin board where combat troops are serving and perhaps the Commandant of the Marine Corps will review the policy of embedding news people, who have no respect for the dead, with the people that we send in harm’s way.
RIP Lance Corporal Bernard and Semper Fi

I just wanted to add my voice to the choir of those who are thoroughly disgusted by the behavior of the AP. I sent them as scathing an email I could conjure up, while still trying to be as concise as possible. I’m also planning on contacting my local newspapers, begging them to instead rely on the AP’s competitors for their news wire services. And of course, I’ll most likely be sending a letter to officials in the military as well, adding my voice to your request that they deny any AP requests for embedding with the troops. If they aren’t going to follow the rules, if they aren’t going to respect the wishes of the family – hell, if they’re going to sacrifice their very humanity – they don’t deserve the hospitality of the US Military.
Thanks for keeping this information out in the forefront for more people to see. More people need to know just what’s so wrong with most of the MSM today. The AP is a perfect example of why the mainstream media and their yellow journalism just isn’t going extinct fast enough.

Julie Jacobson is the photographer for AP who took the picture in question. As all professional photogs, she shoots first and asks questions later. She has in fact taken many famous pictures over the years. Later, she did ask herself the question, “Should I send this on?”
Julie Jacobson, in her own words;

Ms. Jacobson considered these and other questions in a journal entry written five days after the attack, which she subsequently distributed among friends and colleagues: “I shot images that day well aware that those images could very possibly never see the light of day. In fact I was sure of it. But I still found myself recording them. To ignore a moment like that simply because of a phrase in section 8, paragraph 1 of some 10-page form would have been wrong. I was recording his pending death, just as I had recorded his life moments before walking the point in the bazaar.” She continued:

Death is a part of life and most certainly a part of war. Isn’t that why we’re here? To document for now and for history the events of this war? We’d shot everything else thus far and even after, from feature images of a Marine talking on a SAT phone to his girlfriend, all the way to happy meetings between Marines and civilians. So shooting the image was not a question.

To publish or not is the question. The image is not the most technically sound, but his face is visible as are his wounds. Many factors come into play. There’s the form we signed agreeing to how and what we would cover while embedded. It says we can photograph casualties from a respectable distance and in such a way that the person is not identifiable. Then you think about the relatives and friends of Bernard. Would you, as a parent, want that image posted for all the world to see? Or even would you want to see how your son died? You’d probably want to remember him another way. Although, it was interesting to watch the Marines from his squad flip through the images from that day on my computer (they asked to see them). They did stop when they came to that moment. But none of them complained or grew angry about it. They understood that it was what it was. They understand, despite that he was their friend, it was the reality of things.

Then there’s the journalism side of things, which is what I am and why I’m here. We are allowed to report the name of the casualty as soon as next of kin has been notified. It is necessary and good to recognize those who die in times of war. But to me, a name on a piece of paper barely touches personalizing casualties. An image brings it home so much closer. An image personalizes that death and makes people see what it really means to have young men die in combat. It may be shocking to see, and while I’m not trying to force anything down anyone’s throat, I think it is necessary for people to see the good, the bad and the ugly in order to reflect upon ourselves as human beings.

It is necessary to be bothered from time to time. It is too easy to sit at Starbuck’s far away across the sea and read about the casualty and then move on without much of another thought about it. It’s not as easy to see an image of that casualty and not think about it. I never expect to change the world or stop war with one picture, but only hope that I make some people think beyond their comfort zones and hope that a few of them will be moved into some kind of action, be it joining a protest, or sending that care package they’ve put off for weeks, or writing that letter they keep meaning to write, or donating money to some worthy N.G.O., or just remembering to say I love you to someone at home. Something.

I believe that is why I decided to send the photo in to the N.Y. desk despite what the media rules of engagement said, to start some conversation about it and hope that it will move out there. It bothered me too much not to have at least some discussion about it. And with great respect and understanding to all the opposing arguments to publication, I feel that as journalists it is our social responsibility to record and publish such images. We have no restrictions to shoot or publish casualties from opposition forces, or even civilian casualties. Are those people less human than American or other NATO soldiers?

So, debate amongst yourselves or maybe just to yourself. Send me your thoughts if you like. Enlighten me if you disagree.

[My emphasis above]
In other words, “My agenda, my rules.”
In the end, the AP made the final call, again; “My agenda, my rules”.

Okay fine. Enlighten her.

Note to lefties;
“Don’t be afraid to see what you see.” -Ronald Reagan

Activists taking Action

Join the RedState Strike Force

Senate Conservatives Fund	House Conservatives Fund
The Precinct Project	Jeff Gorell for Assembly

Conservatives Victorious in 2010

the moment that the AP disregarded the wishes of both the family and the military in publishing this photograph. Lance Corporal Bernard could have had the most dignified photo that has ever been taken in the course of the Iraq conflict, and it still would have been in extremely poor taste of the media to trample over the wishes of the family in its rush to politicize the last moments of a young soldier’s life. I still sit here, amazed that the AP would commit to such a rash and cold-hearted decision. Words fail me, and it is my hope that, despite the AP’s callous disregard for the family’s feelings, the family will be able to grieve privately. RIP, Lance Corporal.

What it should have come down to is simple. If 99.99999% of Americans wanted this picture published, but the Family of the dying HERO didn’t, it should NEVER have been published. NEVER!!!! How F-ing hard is it to understand? Do AP journalists grow up in a society in which you don’t intentionally inflict pain on your neighbor? This American Hero’s Father asked that the photo of his dying son not be used to promote a political agenda, and he was ignored. The people that wanted to use the picture will forget about it in a few weeks or months. It won’t be fresh in their minds. The family of this American Hero will always have to worry about accidentally coming across the photo of the moment their son’s life was ending while searching the net. Personally, i would like to see the AP removed from combat coverage, i would also like to see the AP ignored when trying to get stories from politicians. I would like to see Robert Gibbs refuse to call on the AP representative during press briefings. I just won’t hold my breath….

We are going to assume no one here has ever carried a Pro-Life sign with a picture of a dead child on it? Just checking.

Sarah Palin: Shame on the Associated Press for Ignoring the Wishes of a Grieving Family

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=129417598434