Notes: 46 / 1 year ago
from self-ownership (originally from gizmodocom)
User Manual: Don’t Instagram Natural Disasters
By Sam Biddle
Instagram is a nice thing. It’s fun to peek at the lives of others, and it’s fun to make our photos look fun. But there’s nothing fun about a hurricane people are dying in, and scenes from a horrific crisis don’t deserve to be drenched in your sepia.
But if you post the photo without a filter, it’s okay? Why does the filter on a photo matter? There’s absolutely nothing wrong with using technology to document history. In fact, it’s an amazing thing. It gives those of us outside of the northeast some perspective on the current situation. This is something I’d expect Gizmodo, a website supposedly focused on technology, to embrace.
But no. Their writers continually show that they have absolutely no capacity to use their brains. This article is proof of that.
I won’t defend Gizmodo, because GIzmodo will always be Gizmodo (btw, Gizmodo is no tech site; they’re more a tech tabloid). However, Adam, what are you even saying. Instagram is not “technology,” it’s recoloring imagery to look more than what is really there. Photojournalists have debated this for years, so I won’t start anything now. The thing is, it’s fine to use edited photos if you’re trying to create a work that stands on their own, however, do you really want your perspective on a real-life event to be colored (no pun intended) by what is meant to be art?