In the Sept. 4 edition of The Salt Lake Tribune we ran a story and photographs from The Associated Press that detailed a day an AP reporter and photographer spent with Golf Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines in Dahaneh, Afghanistan, as the patrol moved into a pomegranate grove where they understood Taliban fighters were lying in wait.
As terrible as the consequences of this raid were for deceased Lance Cpl. Joshua “Bernie” Bernard, The Associated Press staffers filed a story and photographs that gave a clear view of the horrors of war. Editors at many newspapers — including The Tribune — knew the story and photographs were disturbing, but they decided to run them because they demonstrated the terror of fighting the Taliban on its own ground. The armed forces have carefully controlled reporter and photographer access to units in the Afghanistan campaign that U.S. troops have fought since shortly after the 9/11 attacks. It is fitting that I am writing this column on the eighth anniversary of those attacks.
This reader e-mail typified the complaints I got from readers upset that we ran a photograph of two Marines trying to save their mortally wounded compadre:
“Now a picture of a mortally wounded Marine in Afghanistan. When did displays of humans in the process of dying become acceptable journalism?”
For those who did not see the photograph, it was shot from a distance with a long lens, meaning the photograph looked fuzzy. The photo did depict the frenzy of activity by the two Marines working on Bernard. We ran the photo inside the front section, and we carried a warning on the front page that the story had a graphic photo inside.
Tribune Editor Nancy Conway explains the editors’ decision to run the package:
“It is our job to inform — to tell the truth to the best of our ability. The photo of the wounded Lance Cpl. Josh Bernard is real. It is a powerful, painful reminder of the reality of war.
“You could argue it would be dishonest not to show that reality when we can. Should we censor photos like this? I don’t think so. And I believe our readers don’t think so. They deserve an accurate view — not a sanitized view.
“All that said, it is never an easy decision to run a photo like that. We discuss our options on a case-by-case basis and try to weigh the public’s right to know against the possible harm by running it.
“When we made the decision to go with this photo we were unaware of the father’s request not to run the photo or that Defense Secretary Robert Gates did not want the AP to release the photo. Would it have made a difference? I don’t know for sure, but I think not.
“What may have made a difference is if the soldier were local.”
University of Utah associate professor lecturer Jim Fisher, a former war photographer, understands such photographs from an editor’s viewpoint and a photographer’s stance:
“Responsible journalists know that to cover a horrible situation they have to show their readers the truth. And they know that truth is going to be hard to face.
“This image [of the dying Marine] is much less graphic than many other well-known pictures from other situations, and it carries an element of truth that text alone cannot.”
Glen Warchol, author of the Salt Lake Crawler blog on our Web site, picked up the photo and ran it with his commentary.
He explains, “I agree with AP when it said if you are going to have wars, you need to show them. In the series of photos, we showed the memorial service held by his comrades. We showed him on patrol early in the day. It wasn’t just showing a horrible photo; it was about what the citizens learn.”
There is little I can add to those three voices, except to note I was moved to tears when I read the story and looked at the photographs.
