Brendan Smialowski, a freelance photographer who has covered White House events since 2003, was also at the White House on Sunday night working, in this case, for the European Press Photo Agency. Smialowski, too, photographed the reenactment and captioned one of his resulting photos (in which Obama’s mouth appears closed) as follows:
U.S. President Barack Obama stands after making a televised statement at the White House in Washington, D.C. on May 1, 2011.
That is, literally, what the president is doing in the image. We are told, as in the AP and Reuters captions, that what we are seeing took place “after” the presidential address. Still. I guess I’d like to see the word “reenactment” right there in all the captions. Several photographers used the r-word when talking to Tompkins for his piece. Smialowki used it when talking to me. Smialowski also told me that, as a journalist, he has “an issue” with these reenactments after photos. That he’s “always been a little uncomfortable” with them, but that he does his best to “address it in the caption, make it clear that it’s not the actual address.”
Doug Mills, a New York Times photographer, told Tompkins, “We [still photographers] have never, never, never, ever been allowed to cover a live presidential address to the nation!” Smialowski, however, recalled a time when he was able to photograph a presidential address as it actually happened: Obama was speaking to the nation from the Oval Office (Smialowski couldn’t recall the content of the speech) and photographers were “held outside in the Rose Garden and had the opportunity to photograph [Obama] through the window because the light was right.” He called this a “great compromise,” in that the president couldn’t hear the camera noise and there was “no way the president was going to look out the window and see one of us looking back at him” as it was nighttime.
A bit paparazzi, perhaps. Still, better than a reenactment.
(**Answer: The top image is a TV grab of the president delivering the address to the nation. The bottom image is Jason Reed’s photo of the president reenacting his address.)
If you ever see questions @ celebrity events, you'll find that you cannot hear answers over the click of cameras, and you cannot see anything over the flashing of lightbulbs. I for one prefer an announcement that sounds like a sober serious announcement, without the camera clicks and flashes. If the media wants a reenactment for the flashes & the pretty pictures, I don't mind that. But it would have looked severely out of place to have Obama's original address sound like a walk down the red carpet, where you could neither hear nor see what was going on.
#1 Posted by Thalai, CJR on Wed 4 May 2011 at 07:05 PM
Meh. Much ado about nothing. Fifty-three million people saw the videocast in real time, and we can watch it again any time they choose. What's so important about the photo itself? It's hard to get worked up about this, and even harder to buy into your hand-wringing over so-called "transparency."
Where the hell were you people during the last administration, who closed the Press Corps out of EVERY event, or completely stage-managed it? I'll tell you -- you were rolling over like obedient puppy dogs for Ari Fleischer and Dana Perino, never having the nerve or the guts to complain -- much less write about -- about the REAL secrecy of the Bush Administration. Remember Cheney's energy policy meeting? The most secretive administration in history, and the White House Press Corpse rolled over every single day for their tummy rub.
#2 Posted by James, CJR on Wed 4 May 2011 at 07:12 PM
To be fair, James, Liz covered Bush era stagecraft as well
http://www.cjr.org/politics/softballs_for_the_prez_cookies.php
#3 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 4 May 2011 at 10:16 PM
Thanks for the link, Thimbles. Interesting. I didn't know Ed Chen was formerly with the LAT, when it was still a decent newspaper.
I don't think it changes the fact, however, that
1) a press corps that was hiding under their collective desks during the years Dick Cheney was secretly running his Fourth Branch of Government all of a sudden arouses from their collective slumber to grouse and complain about such ridiculous non-issues and
2) Ms. Cox Barrett suddenly discovers and implies some kind of nefarious wrongdoing by the Obama Administration in a press corps operational protocol which has been in place for literally decades (according to the link she provided)
And by "implies some nefarious wrongdoing" I refer you to the title of this piece.
"A Photo of History Being Made (Up)?" An image of a televised speech viewed by 53 million people, and available for viewing at any time is "made up"?
Please. The whole piece is just overblown and way overwritten. IMHO.
#4 Posted by James, CJR on Wed 4 May 2011 at 11:26 PM