Warning: Graphic Content
Death of an Iraqi Soldier, Ken Jarecke. Taken during the Gulf War, 1991.
Context: The Gulf War
The Gulf war began in 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait after Kuwait refused to forgive Iraq's debt and disputes over oil could not be resolved. As a result, Iraq moved to unilaterally annex Kuwait. The UNSC immediately condemned the invasion and imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. The US began a military intervention simultaneously, moving troops into the area and encouraging other countries to join in coalition. The American intervention was multilateral, with support from the UK, France, Canada, Argentina and Australia (Pakistan Horizon 117-125). The war also marked the first time live news coverage of the events from the front lines of combat were broadcast (Robertson).
The American led coalition won the war in only a year, liberating Kuwait and scattering Iraqi forces through a combined aerial bombing campaign and ground attack. The war is noted for the American's lopsided victory and subsequent failure to secure a treaty or satisfactory resolution of the war, which led to the Iraq War several years later (Wright).
Context of the image
"If I don't make pictures like this, people like my mother will think what they see in war is what they see in movies." (Jarecke)
Ken Jarecke was travelling with a US army unit along highway 8 towards Kuwait when they came across a burned out truck in the middle of the road. Halfway out the window, the charred remains of an Iraqi soldier emerged from the ruin. Jarecke had to convince his military escort to stop and allow him to take the photo and later it was deemed too graphic and unsettling to publish in the US (Jarecke). Due to their experience with the media and photography in the Vietnam War, the Pentagon subjected journalists and photographers as well as news outlets to much stricter guidelines and controls than in previous conflicts. As such, every press resource was funnelled through the US Department of Defence Pool System, allowing the sharing of journalist's work across press organizations. However, American editorial staff across the country chose not to display the image and as such the photo was unseen in the US. In the UK, the image was published by the London Observer and caused great controversy, leading citizens to question whether they wanted to be involved in this kind of war (Selwyn-Holmes). Faced with criticism of the image's graphic nature, Jarecke responded: “If we’re big enough to fight a war, we should be big enough to look at it.” (Jarecke)
Key Issues: Graphic content in the media, "Sanitizing" war, Logistical issues with on site photography, Manipulation from both sides.
"Sanitizing": The reverse criticism of news papers for being too conservative and sensitive to public opinion in their coverage of war and by failing to show the full scope of tragedy and suffering. That said, while newspapers are often accused of this, they are just as likely to be criticized for distasteful, desensitizing images that are overly gory (Robertson).
Logistical issues: Another photographer, James Hill has noted that in war, a photographer's ability to capture the most powerful images is often constrained by their military escort or convoy situation.
"It's hard to say the media is at fault itself," he says of the lack of graphic images. Not military restrictions but simple logistics meant Hill couldn't always photograph what he saw on the road to Baghdad. "You're driving where they're driving," he says. "I was in my own Jeep... But if you're in a convoy, you're not saying, 'Hey, that's a good picture. Let's stop and take it.'" ( Robertson)
Manipulation: In other instances, with some examples just recently coming out of Syria included the manipulation of photographs through arranging scenes, cropping, or otherwise doctoring photos to present one side in a more favourable, sympathy-inducing light (Dalal).
Colin Crawford, assistant managing editor, photography, at the Los Angeles Times, remembers one photo taken by Carolyn Cole of two dead children in a morgue. It was a "very powerful, moving photo," he says. But Iraqis had taken journalists to the morgue, and the paper didn't know how the children had been killed. Had a journalist been able to confirm that U.S. bombs had killed them, or perhaps if Cole hadn't been led to the scene in a parade of journalists, the Times would have run the photo, Crawford says. But in this case, "we were being used," he says. "We felt manipulated, and we didn't run it." (Robertson)
Significance
For me the significance of this image lies largely in the editorial decisions. Showing war for what it is, all aspects of it, even if it is disturbing and unappealing is a decision that editors, news outlets and journalists must make. However, it is clear with this image that the media is often influenced to varying degrees by their nation's governments, in order to control or at least mitigate public perceptions of wars. That said, Ken Jarecke's decision to take the photograph and show the world that even the "cleanest, well strategized and executed" of wars can have terrible consequences. His photo shows us that wars always hurt someone, somewhere and that we should never forget that, even in victory.
On the other hand, scholars like Bowden argue that desensitization to war has the potential to become a real problem in the future (Bowden 1-20). While this image seems to cause more questions about whether war is the right choice than anything, I could also see how being affronted with images like these regularly could cause somewhat of a numbing of public perception.
Works Cited
Bowden, Mark. "The Killing Machines." Atlantic. 21 sept 2013: 1-20. Web. 5 Apr. 2014.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/>.
"Chronology of Events in the Gulf." Pakistan Horizon. 43.4 (1990): 117-125. Print.Dalal, Myriam. "Beirut." This Viral Photo Purporting to Show an Orphaned Syrian Boy Isn't What You Think It is. ITX Sari, 17 Jan 2014.
Web. 8 Apr 2014. <http://www.beirut.com/l/30914>.
Jarecke, Ken. "Picture power: Death of an Iraqi soldier." BBC World World Service Program. 09 May 2005. BBC News. May . Web.
5 Apr 2014. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4528745.stm.
Robertson, Lori. "Images of War." American Journalism Review. October/November (2004): n. page. Print.
<http://ajrarchive.org/article_printable.asp?id=3759>.
Selwyn-Holmes, Alex. "Dead Iraqi Soldier." Iconic Photos. Wordpress.com, 17 Jun 2010. Web. 5 Apr. 2014.
Wright, Steven (2007). The United States and Persian Gulf Security: The Foundations of the War on Terror. Ithaca Press. ISBN
978-0-86372-321-6.
Image:
Jarecke, Ken. "Picture power: Death of an Iraqi soldier." BBC World World Service Program. 09 May 2005. BBC News. May . Web.
5 Apr 2014. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4528745.stm.
Context: The Gulf War
The Gulf war began in 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait after Kuwait refused to forgive Iraq's debt and disputes over oil could not be resolved. As a result, Iraq moved to unilaterally annex Kuwait. The UNSC immediately condemned the invasion and imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. The US began a military intervention simultaneously, moving troops into the area and encouraging other countries to join in coalition. The American intervention was multilateral, with support from the UK, France, Canada, Argentina and Australia (Pakistan Horizon 117-125). The war also marked the first time live news coverage of the events from the front lines of combat were broadcast (Robertson).
The American led coalition won the war in only a year, liberating Kuwait and scattering Iraqi forces through a combined aerial bombing campaign and ground attack. The war is noted for the American's lopsided victory and subsequent failure to secure a treaty or satisfactory resolution of the war, which led to the Iraq War several years later (Wright).
Context of the image
"If I don't make pictures like this, people like my mother will think what they see in war is what they see in movies." (Jarecke)
Ken Jarecke was travelling with a US army unit along highway 8 towards Kuwait when they came across a burned out truck in the middle of the road. Halfway out the window, the charred remains of an Iraqi soldier emerged from the ruin. Jarecke had to convince his military escort to stop and allow him to take the photo and later it was deemed too graphic and unsettling to publish in the US (Jarecke). Due to their experience with the media and photography in the Vietnam War, the Pentagon subjected journalists and photographers as well as news outlets to much stricter guidelines and controls than in previous conflicts. As such, every press resource was funnelled through the US Department of Defence Pool System, allowing the sharing of journalist's work across press organizations. However, American editorial staff across the country chose not to display the image and as such the photo was unseen in the US. In the UK, the image was published by the London Observer and caused great controversy, leading citizens to question whether they wanted to be involved in this kind of war (Selwyn-Holmes). Faced with criticism of the image's graphic nature, Jarecke responded: “If we’re big enough to fight a war, we should be big enough to look at it.” (Jarecke)
Key Issues: Graphic content in the media, "Sanitizing" war, Logistical issues with on site photography, Manipulation from both sides.
"Sanitizing": The reverse criticism of news papers for being too conservative and sensitive to public opinion in their coverage of war and by failing to show the full scope of tragedy and suffering. That said, while newspapers are often accused of this, they are just as likely to be criticized for distasteful, desensitizing images that are overly gory (Robertson).
Logistical issues: Another photographer, James Hill has noted that in war, a photographer's ability to capture the most powerful images is often constrained by their military escort or convoy situation.
"It's hard to say the media is at fault itself," he says of the lack of graphic images. Not military restrictions but simple logistics meant Hill couldn't always photograph what he saw on the road to Baghdad. "You're driving where they're driving," he says. "I was in my own Jeep... But if you're in a convoy, you're not saying, 'Hey, that's a good picture. Let's stop and take it.'" ( Robertson)
Manipulation: In other instances, with some examples just recently coming out of Syria included the manipulation of photographs through arranging scenes, cropping, or otherwise doctoring photos to present one side in a more favourable, sympathy-inducing light (Dalal).
Colin Crawford, assistant managing editor, photography, at the Los Angeles Times, remembers one photo taken by Carolyn Cole of two dead children in a morgue. It was a "very powerful, moving photo," he says. But Iraqis had taken journalists to the morgue, and the paper didn't know how the children had been killed. Had a journalist been able to confirm that U.S. bombs had killed them, or perhaps if Cole hadn't been led to the scene in a parade of journalists, the Times would have run the photo, Crawford says. But in this case, "we were being used," he says. "We felt manipulated, and we didn't run it." (Robertson)
Significance
For me the significance of this image lies largely in the editorial decisions. Showing war for what it is, all aspects of it, even if it is disturbing and unappealing is a decision that editors, news outlets and journalists must make. However, it is clear with this image that the media is often influenced to varying degrees by their nation's governments, in order to control or at least mitigate public perceptions of wars. That said, Ken Jarecke's decision to take the photograph and show the world that even the "cleanest, well strategized and executed" of wars can have terrible consequences. His photo shows us that wars always hurt someone, somewhere and that we should never forget that, even in victory.
On the other hand, scholars like Bowden argue that desensitization to war has the potential to become a real problem in the future (Bowden 1-20). While this image seems to cause more questions about whether war is the right choice than anything, I could also see how being affronted with images like these regularly could cause somewhat of a numbing of public perception.
Works Cited
Bowden, Mark. "The Killing Machines." Atlantic. 21 sept 2013: 1-20. Web. 5 Apr. 2014.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/>.
"Chronology of Events in the Gulf." Pakistan Horizon. 43.4 (1990): 117-125. Print.Dalal, Myriam. "Beirut." This Viral Photo Purporting to Show an Orphaned Syrian Boy Isn't What You Think It is. ITX Sari, 17 Jan 2014.
Web. 8 Apr 2014. <http://www.beirut.com/l/30914>.
Jarecke, Ken. "Picture power: Death of an Iraqi soldier." BBC World World Service Program. 09 May 2005. BBC News. May . Web.
5 Apr 2014. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4528745.stm.
Robertson, Lori. "Images of War." American Journalism Review. October/November (2004): n. page. Print.
<http://ajrarchive.org/article_printable.asp?id=3759>.
Selwyn-Holmes, Alex. "Dead Iraqi Soldier." Iconic Photos. Wordpress.com, 17 Jun 2010. Web. 5 Apr. 2014.
Wright, Steven (2007). The United States and Persian Gulf Security: The Foundations of the War on Terror. Ithaca Press. ISBN
978-0-86372-321-6.
Image:
Jarecke, Ken. "Picture power: Death of an Iraqi soldier." BBC World World Service Program. 09 May 2005. BBC News. May . Web.
5 Apr 2014. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4528745.stm.