Photojournalism

The reading for this week was on using photography to better tell a story. While I agree that pictures definitely help readers understand a story, I think there needs to be a balance. While reading this chapter (chapter 6 in Briggs' Journalism Next), I was somewhat creating a pros and cons list of using photographs in stories and/or blogs. Here is what I came up with:

PROs:
1. Pulls reader into story
2. Literally helps them see the action
3. Puts a face to the story, making it more personal
4. Takes up less space than text would in order to accurately describe the emotions (assuming that a picture is worth 1,000 words)

CONs:
1. If the picture doesn't fit the story, it is distracting to the reader
2. If there are too many pictures in a story, readers (or at least myself, when I am reading) are more likely to look at the photos and cutlines as opposed to reading the full text
3. Pictures can be misleading. If the story has multiple parts and the photo only captures one, then it automatically puts more weight on that aspect, even if it isn't warranted
4. It allows journalists to be lazy and let a picture do the work for them

If i had to choose, though, I think I am a fan of photojournalism. As long as the photography is done well, fits the story and isn't misleading, it can add a lot to the story. Oh, and, sometimes it's nice to be lazy and let a picture do the work for you :)