OccupyMN Planning Meeting on the Eve of the Occupation
Yesterday evening I went to the OccupyMN planning and general assembly meetings being held at Stevens Park. I went to photograph the proceedings and to get a sense of the membership of OccupyMN. What I saw was a group of approximately 50 young people preparing for an orderly and peaceful demonstration.
The planning meeting divided into smaller working groups. One (above) developed the procedures for the General Assembly meeting that would start the occupation of the plaza. This meeting would provide the protestors the forum to set an agenda and rules of conduct.
Photographer’s Dilemma
While I was photographing the proceedings the issue was raised about recording/photographing members at the meeting. By popular vote the majority said that it was okay: a minority of 5 opposed. It was decided that if a person did not want to be photographed, they would go a specific spot that was not in the frame of the video recording equipment. I worked to avoid photographing the designated area.
Despite my obvious efforts to respect the wishes of the minority, I had my back to them, three young men felt compelled to challenge me. In essence, I told them that I would attempt to honor their privacy but they were wasting their time trying to get me to stop.
Afterwards, while preparing photos for posting, I caught myself blurring out the face of a protester who I thought might want privacy. He was in the background located behind the subject area. This got me thinking of image and photographer integrity.
The goal of a photographer at a political event is to capture the moment as accurately as possible. Ideally, the photographer is a neutral observer who works without drawing attention to themselves. With an image literate population it is easy for a photographer to be used by some to shape coverage.
The photographer needs a set of rules that he/she can apply to all public events. This provides for an evenhanded approach to all instances.
What to do?
To begin, a political protest is a public event. The entire point of a protest is to draw attention to an issue. Therefore, a protest is open to observation and documentation regardless of what restrictive rules the protesters may vote for.
This is where it gets tricky. To some degree, a photographer relies on the goodwill of the group to allow him to work. There are plenty of examples from both here and around the world of photographers being physically intimidated by protestors or police. It is important for the photographer to be aware of the feelings of the majority and minority groups. Hopefully this minimizes potential conflict.
For me this means that I will not single out individuals who have expressed to me or through a group action (standing in a no-photo space). This self-imposed restriction disappears if that individual begins to act in a way that is worthy of documentation, i.e. doing something that is intended to draw attention to themselves.
In other instances the demands of photo composition take precedence and people not wishing to be photographed might appear in the background or as part of a larger group.
It is the responsibility of the person looking for anonymity to be anonymous. Wearing distinctive clothing and standing in the thick of the action are counter productive.
Lastly, when it comes to public political events there are two uncontrolled sources of images: cellphones of the participants and law enforcement. In today’s hyper vigilant atmosphere it must be assumed that law enforcement agencies will be recording the event and identifying participants. With social media images are posted and tweeted and individuals portrayed can be tagged, ad hoc identification.
I deleted the modified image and went back to the original. Self censorship is a slippery slope that compromises the image and the photographer.