Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 77 posts

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#41

Post by [deleted] »

jbooth wrote: post #31
andreyf wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you take those pictures? Use your imagination ;) Edit (for you down-voters): Fine, here's some off the top of my head: * Rent your own plane and fly over without permission, * register a fishing company and get a job working for BP, * find a way to take pictures while avoiding detection, or just * bribe the fishermen. These are off the top of my head, I imagine someone whose full time job depends on thinking…

Who's funding these entrepreneurial journalists? "The truth" is worth a lot of gratitude and 0 actual dollars.

[deleted]

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#42

Post by jrwoodruff »

dkarl wrote: post #38
jbooth wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's funding these entrepreneurial journalists? "The truth" is worth a lot of gratitude and 0 actual dollars.

Journalism is all about advertising, i.e., page views and publications sold. This is one of the hottest topics in the U.S. right now. Nobody likes dry analysis; everyone is eager for a quick, vivid, and emotionally compelling way to engage with the story. Therefore, if you publish more and better pictures than the competition, you'll attract more (non-)readers and make more money.

Sure advertising pays the bills, but you don't think big media knows this? The truth is real news is less and less profitable. Reporting a story like this takes big resources - huge resources if you really want to break a new lede.

Ultimately, shooting 100 high school basketball games for zoned publications and a s#%t ton of photo galleries is cheaper and will sell more ads. After all, what company wants their ad next to a photo of a dying, oil-covered bird.

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#44

Post by ars »

guns wrote: post #40
jrwoodruff wrote: post #30

Here's the most graphic images I've seen, but they're over a week old and pretty tame compared to Valdez. http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/oil_reaches_louisia...

I hope you mean the images are pretty tame in comparison, and not the spill itself. Not only has the BP leak massively surpassed Valdez in volume (2-10x), it took place a mile underwater, which multiplies it's danger. Exxon Valdez was a surface spill, so most of the oil that was spilled stayed on the surface of the water and began to have dramatic effects on the coastal environment. This disaster is leaking millions…

Ah, but the more dilute the spill the better things are.

Bacteria do a wonderful job to biodegrading oil - but only if they have enough oxygen, which is in limited supply. By spreading things out they have enough oxygen to work with.

And yes, 100% of the oil should rise to the surface, but some will rise slowly.

I think the reason we are not seeing a lot of oil is simply that the bacteria ate it.

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#45

Post by ars »

jrwoodruff wrote: post #25
andreyf wrote: post #6

Sounds like a great opportunity for real reporters to dress up as fishermen to sneak out there and take some unique pictures. This kind of thing only stops the half-ass-reporters out there who will go home after running into the coast guard to complain and feel sorry about themselves. boo hoo BP is trying to control the press coverage Uh, yes, that's what a public company has to do: maximize shareholder value. Now do…

The truly messed up thing about this - that we should be very angry about - is the U.S. Government is helping out in the cover up. Yes, companies are supposed to spin and do damage control. I guess getting the coast guard to give you hand is probably a pretty effective way to do that. Also, it should be noted that print media has been in a downward spiral for the last four years and no longer has the reporters, photo…

But why? Why is the coast guard helping? The article didn't even conjecture a reason, they just stated it baldly.

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#46

Post by jbooth »

dkarl wrote: post #38
jbooth wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's funding these entrepreneurial journalists? "The truth" is worth a lot of gratitude and 0 actual dollars.

Journalism is all about advertising, i.e., page views and publications sold. This is one of the hottest topics in the U.S. right now. Nobody likes dry analysis; everyone is eager for a quick, vivid, and emotionally compelling way to engage with the story. Therefore, if you publish more and better pictures than the competition, you'll attract more (non-)readers and make more money.

Still doesn't add up. You're talking about a huge expenditure and significant personal risk in order to hopefully be a viral hit and not just be scooped and republished. Even then, you have to get lucky and pick up an iconic photo, it's not like you're going to find a bunch of great prose in the ocean besides synonyms for "lots of gallons".

Why pursue this story instead of one that's much cheaper and will get you only a fewer impressions on average?

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#47

Post by ascuttlefish »

jrwoodruff wrote: post #25
andreyf wrote: post #6

Sounds like a great opportunity for real reporters to dress up as fishermen to sneak out there and take some unique pictures. This kind of thing only stops the half-ass-reporters out there who will go home after running into the coast guard to complain and feel sorry about themselves. boo hoo BP is trying to control the press coverage Uh, yes, that's what a public company has to do: maximize shareholder value. Now do…

The truly messed up thing about this - that we should be very angry about - is the U.S. Government is helping out in the cover up. Yes, companies are supposed to spin and do damage control. I guess getting the coast guard to give you hand is probably a pretty effective way to do that. Also, it should be noted that print media has been in a downward spiral for the last four years and no longer has the reporters, photo…

Unfortunately, lone bloggers and community journalists don't have the resources to fight a legal battle if caught. Back in the golden age of print media, you at least had the possibility of support from the publication you worked for or its parent company.

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#48

Post by waterlesscloud »

pyre wrote: post #34
jsz0 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The flight ban is also being enforced by the FAA. Probably difficult to find a pilot willing to put their career at risk. I'm not clear why my tax dollars via the FAA should be used to fund the PR response of a public company.

I can see them putting some restrictions on the area due the the massive amount of press that will want access to the airspace (i.e. to prevent aerial traffic jams over the hardest hit areas or the areas with the most damning photos). But the idea that BP is pulling the strings and that only BP-charter flights can get clearance is getting too close to the realm of Big Brother (well, closer to the Neal Stephenson visi…

Funny, there's dozens of aircraft aloft over my city of Los Angeles at any given moment, and it's far smaller than this spill.

Crowded airspace is not the issue.

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#49

Post by dkarl »

jbooth wrote: post #46
dkarl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalism is all about advertising, i.e., page views and publications sold. This is one of the hottest topics in the U.S. right now. Nobody likes dry analysis; everyone is eager for a quick, vivid, and emotionally compelling way to engage with the story. Therefore, if you publish more and better pictures than the competition, you'll attract more (non-)readers and make more money.

Still doesn't add up. You're talking about a huge expenditure and significant personal risk in order to hopefully be a viral hit and not just be scooped and republished. Even then, you have to get lucky and pick up an iconic photo, it's not like you're going to find a bunch of great prose in the ocean besides synonyms for "lots of gallons". Why pursue this story instead of one that's much cheaper and will get you onl…

If the photographers are already in the region racking up travel expenses and trying to charter private planes, expense isn't the problem.

Re: BP's Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill

#50

Post by jrockway »

anigbrowl wrote: post #35
andreyf wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you take those pictures? Use your imagination ;) Edit (for you down-voters): Fine, here's some off the top of my head: * Rent your own plane and fly over without permission, * register a fishing company and get a job working for BP, * find a way to take pictures while avoiding detection, or just * bribe the fishermen. These are off the top of my head, I imagine someone whose full time job depends on thinking…

What you propose risks criminal and civil liability from multiple directions. Few, if any, photojournalists can afford to take such risks. Most news organizations won't. Yes, disasters and war are where much great photojournalism takes place. But it's ironically easier to do that abroad with the specter of the mighty US State Department at your shoulder than it is in your own backyard, where you're just a meddling sh…

This is pure FUD. What criminal and civil statutes would be violated by taking a picture of a public place? Something a low-level drone working for the government says does not a law make.
Post reply on HN