EXTRA CREDIT!!!

1. The man was shoved into the subway tracks, but the person who pushed him is not known. He was ran over by the subway because the driver couldn't come to a stop. He was then taken to a hospital where they confirmed he was dead. The Photographer was able to take the picture of his last moments before the subway passed over him because he has his camera with him, and preferred to take the photo   rather than try to help him out the tracks.

2. The photographer claims he took the photo in an attempt to warn the subway driver with the flash of his camera.

3. No. I believe that before any profession, you have to take care of other people and look out for them. There was no reason to take a picture of a situation like that. Apart from the fact that if he wouldn't have taken a picture he could maybe have saved him,  a picture of somebody's death moment is never ethical. That picture only shows selfishness, cowardliness, and disrespect.  

4. Not nearly. He claims that he was trying to save him that way by trying to warn the driver about the incident, but who believes that? I can't think of any less effective way to help that poor man in that desperate situation. If he really wanted to save him, he could of forgotten about his camera for one second and actually attempt to help him.

5. I disagree. Why? Because it isn't correct to publish a picture of somebody's last moments. As I said before, it is one of the most disrespectful things I can think of. Nobody wants to see their loved one's last moment published on the front sheet of a newspaper.

6.  I believe the second. Maybe photojournalism is all about capturing what is going on, and what is happening in the world, but I will never change my opinion. Life is more important than ANYTHING else. If you as a photographer save that person instead of taking that picture, the situation might get photographed after all, only in a better and improved way and by another photographer a little further from the subway than you :)

7. I'm not sure if I understand the question, but if its what I believe, then it depends. I think and will always think that photographers need to be very professional, and separate their career from their life, but when the situation is a matter of life an death, I think that you shouldn't even think about these things. It should be like an instinct to do what is right, and by saying what is right, I mean looking for the well-being of others before your professional needs.

8. No. not always. As I said, when It is a matter of death, you HAVE to help! It is our obligation to do so. When a photographer has an ability to help put, he/her must do so. There are plenty (unfortunately) of situations in which nothing can be done, for example, the disaster of the twin towers. Those are the times when photojournalist must photograph what is going on because they can't help out. What if there was someone under dust and wood pieces, and that person was dying. Would the photographer be expected to photograph that person as she/ he is dying? No.

9. Helping out the person in need, which in this case was the man that was killed by the subway ):