A very Important Question on morals

[SiliconAddict]

This test has only one question, but it’s a very important one. Please don’t answer it without giving it some serious thought.

By giving an honest answer you will be able to test where you stand morally. The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation, where you will have to make a decision one way or another.

Remember you answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please scroll down slowly and consider each line – This is important for the test to work accurately.



You’re in Florida…In Miami to be exact…There is great chaos going on around you, caused by a hurricane and sever floods There are huge masses of water all around you. You are a CNN photographer and you are in the middle of this great disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless.

You’re trying to shoot some impressive photos. There are houses and floating around you, disappearing into the water. Nature is showing the full force of its destructive powers ripping everything away with it.

Suddenly you see a man in the water, he is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken away by the swell of water and mud. You move closer.

Somehow the man looks familiar. Suddenly you know who it is - It’s George W. Bush.

At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him away.

You have two options. You can save him or take the best photo of your life.

So you can save the life of George W. Bush, or you can shoot a Pulitzer prize winning photo, a unique photo displaying the death of one of the world’s most powerful men.

And here’s the question (Please give an honest answer):



Would you select color film, or rather go with the simplicity of classic black and white?

[Ozi]

Definately colour... you can always use Graphics Convertor or Photoshop to make it Black and White later, but you cannot make the Black and white photo a colour one.

Also, considering all the mud, it would just be a whole lot of Grey if shot on black and white film.

:D love the post mate!

~ozi

[skunk]

Definately colour... you can always use Graphics Convertor or Photoshop to make it Black and White later, but you cannot make the Black and white photo a colour one.

Also, considering all the mud, it would just be a whole lot of Grey if shot on black and white film.

:D love the post mate!

~ozi
I might well hit him over the head with the camera to make SURE. :D :D

[PickledSquirrel]

I'd difinitely go for colour, too. Bush is black and white enough as it is... :D

[pseudobrit]

I'd throw him the camera.

[IJ Reilly]

I've seen this one before, and it's still in poor taste.

[pseudobrit]

I've seen this one before, and it's still in poor taste.

You don't like off-colour jokes?

[IJ Reilly]

You don't like off-colour jokes?

You know I'm as critical of Bush and his cronies as anyone, but I think this kind of thing is crude, not funny. I'm reminded of similar "jokes" told about Bill Clinton, which his opponents justified simply because they didn't like the man. I just don't want to go there.

[skunk]

You know I'm as critical of Bush and his cronies as anyone, but I think this kind of thing is crude, not funny. I'm reminded of similar "jokes" told about Bill Clinton, which his opponents justified simply because they didn't like the man. I just don't want to go there.
Well, you're right, of course. One must resist these irresistible urges. :(

[pseudobrit]

You know I'm as critical of Bush and his cronies as anyone, but I think this kind of thing is crude, not funny. I'm reminded of similar "jokes" told about Bill Clinton, which his opponents justified simply because they didn't like the man. I just don't want to go there.

I was trying to win a Pun of the Year award with that post.

[zimv20]

I was trying to win a Pun of the Year award with that post.
i was going to say something, but i didn't want it down in black and white

[IJ Reilly]

i was going to say something, but i didn't want it down in black and white

That lens itself to a snappy comeback, but I shutter to think about it.

[Sun Baked]

Says quite a bit about the character of the people who would put their job ahead of taking 10 minutes of their time to save somebody's life.

But in reality there are quite a few people who would be unwilling to take the time to save that person's life if they were driving by and were late for work, aka it's fun to look at the accident as long as they don't stop and help.

---

Of course in today's society, taking that picture would set you up for a nice multi-million dollar civil case for wrongful death -- especially if it was later found you could have saved him.

[Desertrat]

To stay with journalistic morals but totally hijack the thread: This same CNN reporter (presumed to be a U.S. citizen) has been allowed entry to an enemy's side of a war zone. While there, he learns of an upcoming plan of ambush of U.S. troops. He has permission to rather freely come and go from that side of the war zone.

Should he leave, and take advantage of the first opportunity to warn the U.S. leadership of the ambush? Should he stay and be able to break a truly major story?

Would your answer be different if he were from a neutral country? Does any jounalist have any responsibility to reduce bloodshed if possible?

(This very issue was discussed in a round table deal on either PBS or C-Span, some dozen or more years ago. Ex-Pres. Ford, Peter Jennings, various high-level and past-high-level movers and shakers.)

'Rat

Wuz on I-10 & US 90, and since then been playing tourguide for a buddy. Not only his first time west of Mobile, it was his first visit to Mexico. And, I found a new restaurant over in Ojinaga; locally referred to as the "Mexican Mafia Motel restaurant". Excellent food! :D Plus, for four people, doing steaks and seafood and beers and Cokes: $35.

[SiliconAddict]

Dude/s get a sense of humor. The joke sets you up for a moral question and takes you back down with a question on photography. The first time I read it I actually was thinking about what I would do in that situation and then BAM!! Color or B&W.

Bush is an dumb*** but if I had it within my power I'm not going to let a person die over how I feel about them. Hell I'd do the same for Sodamn Insane as well.

This is what is wrong with this country. Everyone's do damn uptight that average American's anus could be used as a particle accelerator with enough pressure on the colon.

[grapes911]

Um...I know it is a joke, but I'd have to save him. Not because of moral issuses, but think of the book that you could write. It would probably make more than a photo. And all the tv shows you'd be on. Money, Money, Money.

[Lyle]

To stay with journalistic morals but totally hijack the thread: This same CNN reporter (presumed to be a U.S. citizen) has been allowed entry to an enemy's side of a war zone. While there, he learns of an upcoming plan of ambush of U.S. troops. He has permission to rather freely come and go from that side of the war zone.

Should he leave, and take advantage of the first opportunity to warn the U.S. leadership of the ambush? Should he stay and be able to break a truly major story?

Would your answer be different if he were from a neutral country? Does any journalist have any responsibility to reduce bloodshed if possible?

As far as I know, they have no professional responsibility to do so. I mean, it's not like journalists take an oath like some other professionals, do they?

Last week, in a different thread, I asked whether Nick Berg would have been executed by his captors if the the pictures of the Abu Ghraib prison abuses had never been made public. I believed then, and still do, that the answer is "yes," he probably would have been killed eventually anyways. But I was surprised at a lot the responses to my question, several of which were along the lines of, "Don't shoot the messenger." I think that given the increasingly blurred line between news and entertainment, the ratings draw of a scandalous story (complete with color photos) easily trumps any consideration of the consequences.