Jill Greenberg Update

There continues to be interest in my previous posts on the Jill Greenberg issue, so I felt a few more links would be a useful resource to those who are researching the topic.

Photo Business News and Forum wrote about it all here and here. The latter post is worth a read for her moderate coverage of a viewpoint that goes decidedly against the mainstream thinking – that Jill Greenberg did nothing wrong. Another blogger who holds that point of view (though immoderately – she is even more outspokenly liberal than Greenberg had been) is Zoe Strauss, who writes that she doesn’t “see what the big deal is.”

Update: I should have been more clear in my comments about Zoe’s post. As she makes clear in her Comment below, she does not think Greenberg is faultless – merely that the images themselves aren’t that big a deal. In this, she and I aren’t too far apart – I personally think the images themselves are too immature and silly to be worth the consternation they’ve caused. I also should have made it clear that the “immoderate” part of her post should probably be seen as personal POV. If Jill Greenberg had been as up-front from the beginning about her feelings about Sen. McCain, we may have all been better served.

I’ll continue to post updates on the issue as long as it remains on the front burner.

Previously:
More on Jill Greenberg
The Jill Greenberg Scandal

~ by David Cupp on September 24, 2008.

2 Responses to “Jill Greenberg Update”

  1. Hey David, thanks for the link! It’s not that I don’t think she did nothing wrong, she screwed the Atlantic and then tried to say it was their fault for hiring her… which is full blown nuts. Although I can’t know for sure, it seems her issue was with McCain, not the Atlantic, and it seems unfair to not give them a heads up. Again, I don’t know how this whole thing unfolded beyond the “putting up photos and then taking them down.” Maybe she did talk to the Atlanic, I don’t know.

    I’m really just interested in the reaction to the images and the ideas of what it means to “own” a photo. I think that the images aren’t particularly incendiary, they seem to fall within the “election time” spectrum of satire, and was interested that people had such strong reactions to work that I thought wasn’t tremendously engaging.

  2. Zoe: I apologize for having mischaracterized your remarks – obviously I shouldn’t write blog posts at 2am😉 Though I try to be politically neutral on the blog, I think when it comes to the issue at hand we basically have the same feelings on all accounts – Greenberg is acting like an idiot, the Photoshopped photos are silly and immature, and so is the furor over them.

    Though I haven’t gotten into it, I’m also interested in the concept of the ownership of the photos. It’s one of those tricky situations that only really works when everyone behaves as expected – I think that’s probably the most damaging part of this whole story, that the cover is off Pandora’s box now.

    Good Lord, I can’t seem to get anything right on this… obviously the comment was directed at Zoe Strauss, not Jill Greenberg.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: