Every profession has its celebrities, so does photojournalism. „Award winning“ is an attribute almost expected in a serious photographer’s biography. Being an accomplished photographer seems to come with added credibility of one’s work and big news outlets like to capitalize on that, sending their star photographer’s out into the field, to get coverage, while the work of local photojournalists mostly goes without special recognition. The death of western journalists is widely published, while the same can’t be said about their local colleagues.
How does does the prevalence of western photographers affect the voice of image based narratives? How does it impact how we see the world, and what are the implications on ethics, voice, and representation?
Photography is an important tool in documenting global events and issues. It can very quickly convey powerful messages and adds credibility to the written word. It’s getting harder in our time of artificially generated imagery and disinformation campaigns but it’s still true, that seeing is believing. Over the years, outstanding photographs have been used to influences public opinion on various issues.
Many photographs are widely recognized and sometimes even helped their creators achieve a certain level of fame, even outside the photography community. Oftentimes, this fame is achieved by photographers from the global north, with pictures taken in the global south (e.g. Steve McCurry’s photograph of the Afghan Girl or James Nachtwey’s photo of a victim of the Rwanda Genocide).
Pictures get recognition through publication on the front pages of large publications (a mechanism, that has yet to be replaced by digital media. Going “viral” might be the contemporary equivalent) or industry awards such as the “World Press Photo”, the Pulitzer Prize or “Visa pur l’Image”.
Photographers sometimes dedicated long periods of time to a certain issue, but since global interest in stories fades after a while, especially news photographers often go from one crisis to the next, leading to a practice labeled as “parachute journalism”. In such cases, photographers and journalists descend into unfamiliar territories, often with limited understanding of the local culture, context, and language, relying on local journalists to work as their “fixers”. This approach can lead to superficial and biased representations, reinforcing stereotypes and failing to capture the complex realities of the issues they cover.
It’s essential for Western photojournalists to acknowledge these challenges and actively work towards a responsible and balanced approach when documenting the Global South.
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak’s essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?” delves into this topic of marginalized voices and representation of disenfranchised communities, particularly in the context of postcolonial societies.
Her ideas can be applied to photography, as they emphasize the importance of giving voice to those historically silenced and underrepresented. Of course, photographers go to these places, to make people visible, but they also need to move beyond merely documenting and representing the Global South as exotic or victimized, but in a way that respects their agency, stories, and self-representation.
Does this imply, that documentary photography should primarily be done by local photographers?
I think that foreign reporters still bring a valuable perspective as an outside observer. Especially when taking photographs for a foreign audience. (An argument that might be countered by the fact, that news agencies cater to a global audience). In the case of war photographers, it might be beneficial for a photographer to not be a citizen of any of the countries involved to be perceived as a neutral spectator.
Photographic careers have often been started by young photographers going places and taking pictures of events of global relevance. Maybe it’s only since they publish their daily lives as instagram stories, that this odd lifestyle reveals its absurd realities, where journalists report from war-zones in one week, and post pictures of cocktails on a beach the week after, while their local colleagues stay behind.
I acknowledge, that it shouldn’t be expected of a photographer to sacrifice their private life to truly immerse themselves in the lives of those they want to document (but still, impressive work is created when people do). It’s maybe even reasonable to keep a certain distance to the places and events documented. But it seems odd, when foreign photographers get awards for observing hardship for a short amount of time, that are other photographer’s daily lives, that they can’t as easily escape.
And further, the disproportionality of news about western photographers killed in a war, compared to local photographers dying.
Photography needs to create fair representations, that are not driven by “otherness” or “orientalism”. Awards being given to white photographers, taking pictures of people of color is still a very common occurrence.
As a final thought, compare two pieces of photographer focused account of the war in ukraine:
New York Times Photographer Lindsay Addario telling the story of a photograph on the newspaper’s podcast “The Daily”, titled “The Story behind a defining war photo” .
AP Journalists tale of working as the last journalists to leave the city of Mariupol: “20 days in Mariupol: The team that documented city’s agony“
One is the account of an american photographer, working with a fixer and security advisor, the other of two internationally experienced reporters, documenting the war in their home country of Ukraine.