Why do people think it’s OK to run an article like this without actual pictures of the thing? You had a journalist there, he couldn’t bust out a digital camera or at least borrow one from a friend? Having journalists who only handle the words and photo people who only handle the pictures is the antiquated world
(picture stolen from google image of Pokemones)
Why do people think it’s OK to run an article like this without actual pictures of the thing? You had a journalist there, he couldn’t bust out a digital camera or at least borrow one from a friend? Having journalists who only handle the words and photo people who only handle the pictures is the antiquated world of the baby boomer media and it makes for stories that are totally useless to the us.
In the movie Shattered Glass, the secretary says to the editor of the New Republic, “That’s what happens when you don’t have pictures” referring to Stephen Glass’ ridiculous lies. I saw it here in New York and the audience laughed at her naiveté because New Yorkers are classist dickheads at movies. The thing is, she was right. Without pictures this article is a waste of my time.
PS: When Newsweek did their cover story on Stephen Glass they had plenty of pictures. Thanks guys!
[...] Part 1 Previous Blog Post [...]