outrageous

I really think this is one of the most irresponsible, outrageous accounts I’ve ever read in a mainstream magazine. Former NYT photographer D. Gorton comes close to accusing an AP photographer of complicity with murder — based on — what?

That he took the photos from an elevated position? That he missed the shot of one of the murders? This is the standards you use …?

Gorton writes,

Whatever the truth is, it may eventually come out. The terrorists know whether or not they were complicit with the photographer. As the insurgency winds down they may broker their way into an amnesty in which, no doubt, many tales will emerge–tales that could confirm the worst suspicions of complicity in murder.

In the meantime the AP is left with almost no reasonable defense of the photographer’s actions, uncorroborated as they are. They can release all of the photographer’s pictures of that day. They can even produce the photographer. But it’s difficult to see what they could do to assure their integrity in this matter.

Well, someone’s integrity is at stake here, that’s for sure.

Gorton, Powerline – if it turns out this photographer had nothing to do with the murder — would you agree you’ve done him a grave injustice? Would you agree you’ve been grossly irresponsible? Or do you think your right to inquiry allow you to level any kind of innuendo, voice any kind of “suspicion,” as long as you offer a retraction if proven wrong?

And let’s be clear: there was never any “misstatements” from the Associated Press on the distance from the AP on the distance from the photographer to the execution. Editor & Publisher made an error, that’s all. And the AP’s account of how the photographer came to take the picture was not unusual; “the story behind the photograph” explainers are nothing new.

UPDATE: I emailed Jim MacMillan, one of the AP photographers who shared in the Pulitzer, to see if he had any comment. (This appears to be more reporting than Gorton did for his Weekly Standard article). MacMillan said no, “I won’t be responding on this topic, except to confirm that I stand by the accuracy of the AP statement here.”

Disappointing, but a perfectly justifiable stance to take, IMHO. If someone sees me with my arm around a 15-year-old girl and starts writing darkly on their blog about their “worst suspicions,” do I have to dignify that with a response? Do I have to prove my innocence?

On whose responsibility does proving an ultra-serious charge like felony murder lie?

Let’s keep in mind that for Gorton, Powerline, Mudville Gazette and others imply to be true, not only would a lone Iraqi national have to be allied with the terrorists — the other members of the AP’s Iraq photo team, who surely viewed the negatives, would also have to be complicit as well.

UPDATE 2: Actually, I take that last paragraph back. Antimedia correctly notes in the comments that nothing about the negatives would prove the photographer didn’t receive a tip from the terrorists. But I think it’s fairly safe to assume that the entire roll of film (or disk of digital images) support his story, since the other, western photographers at the AP’s Baghdad bureau would have seen them as well. Unless they’re all in league with the terrorists…