Here is the Editor\'s Note form the Atlantic Magazine
\"Editors\' Note
We stand by the respectful image of John McCain that we used on our cover, and we expect to be judged by it. We were not aware of the manipulated and dishonest images Jill Greenberg had taken until this past Friday.
When we contract with photographers for portraits, we don\'t vet them for their politics—instead, we assess their professional track records. We had never worked with Jill Greenberg before (and, obviously, we will not work with her again). Based on the portraits she had done of politicians like Arnold Schwarzenegger and her work for publications like Time, Wired, and Portfolio, we expected her, like the other photographers we work with, to behave professionally.
Jill Greenberg has obviously not done that. She has, in fact, disgraced herself, and we are appalled by the manipulated images she has created for her Web site of John McCain.\"
Sounds like the magazine feels it was snookered by Ms Greenberg. i guess they didn\'t do a lot of vetting either.
While I feel that her manipulated pictures of McCain are way over the top it\'s her opinion and her vision, like it or not. To say that you are going to check your ego at the door and never let your opinion influence your images is a good thing for wedding and portrait photographers dealing with private citizens or working at the DMV, but will such a neutral position help someone working at her level? At least the picture used by the magazine is well done and she didn\'t just deliver spooky lit pix.
I guess Newman forgot to check his ego at the door of the Krupp Iron Works..
Shocked! Shocked to find out gambling is going on, er I mean shocked to find that opinions are being expressed by loudmouth political photographers working for political magazines taking pix of politicians.
Sep 15, 2008 at 03:47 PM
Previous versions of Micky Bill's message #6170616 « A photographer shows no ethics »
