At what point do we say something is too far? My opinion is that using photography as a medium to gain fame, be it good or bad, isn’t a new thing. But as time goes on, seemingly, these things are lacking in taste more and more.
Kathy Griffin recently faced a large backlash for a photoshoot that showed her holding Donald Trump's decapitated head. The old saying "there’s no such thing as bad publicity" seems to be a potential reason for doing something like this. The photographer, Tyler Shields, likely knew it’d go viral, which would spread his name everywhere; even if it’s in bad taste, people are still hearing his name. Personally, I’d stay away from something that goes quite this far with it. In the past, depicting something such as murdering a president even in “acting” was considered a threat and would garner a visit from the FBI, potentially with criminal charges. Now, with the Internet being what it is, people seem to get more brazen.
If someone didn’t like the current president and made a “clown nose” on an image in poking fun, ok sure, whatever. But heinous violence? Especially for a man with children, this is, in my opinion, super tacky. How would you like to have to explain that to your children when they asked what the deal was?
And for Kathy Griffin, is doing what she did, then apologizing somehow going to make it go away? Would she have apologized on her own based on her own morality if the Internet hadn’t flamed her for it? If so, why do it in the first place? If knowing doing something like that causes a firestorm, then apologizing (knowing it doesn't do any good) seems like that was the plan all along, a tacky publicity stunt to try to not become irrelevant in her own industry. Regardless of one’s political opinion, I don’t feel things should ever go this far.
What do you think? Is it worth it to participate in something like this for the publicity, or should morality come into play? And should her apology mean something?
Image source: Tyler Shields (uncensored image is displayed here)
Trust me, I'm aware of these incidents and didn't like them either. I'm only questioning your assertion that it was worse on the Right. It's gotten so bad, it would be like comparing the number of grains of sand on all the beaches of the world to the stars in the heavens. Count all you like but you won't come up with a conclusive answer. This probably won't surprise you but I'm not prepared to just take some scientists' word for it. I know too many scientists! ;-)
Let's not lose focus of the facts here; She has never shown any signs of being even slightly funny, and is doing anything she can to not follow in the footsteps of her comedy twin Carrot Top. Too late Kathy, bye now!
I try and avoid the media for just these reasons. I had not seen this, and I'm sad she is getting all of this publicity. She is just trolling and FS took the bait. Hate and poison like this should be buried, not spread.
Well to be fair here, the bait she set out just lost her millions in dollars and she was canned from her most public gig which was hosting CNN's New Year's Eve.
One head made to look bad for the cameras and the audience, one made up to look good for the cameras and audience. Even decapitated, I think the Donald still looks better than Griffin.
What do dose tolerance, peace, and love mean again? I think this is on the border of threatening about beheading someone now, and this is at least wrong and stupid.
You can be sure Donnie is going to call her some naughty names on Twitter fairly soon. He might even grab her by the pussy, if he gets a chance.
At what point should the photographer take a portion of the responsibility? I haven't gone in deep on the story but was there any nudging from Tyler Shields?
All the criticisms of her aside, which I agree with, she has got her name and face across the world with this. I'd never heard of her before, but now I know her name and I would easily recognise her in future.
Other celebrities would kill to have such amazing exposure - all she had to do was pretend to! So I'd say this woman and her publicity company will be over the moon right now, celebrating about every article like the one we are commenting on here.
Eh, she is has been on one of the most watched TV events for 10 years straight (cnn's New Year's Eve show). This is more a career killer than good promotion.
Well she's got herself real international fame now. In a few months' time, most of us will have forgotten why she had her 15 minutes of fame outside the US, but if she pops up on our screens, we'll likely think "there's a familiar face, I don't remember hearing her speak before, I wonder what she has to say?" That kind of exposure across the world is priceless.
I just don't think religion or politics are well served on this site...in any capacity..sheesh.
Well, serving religion or politics is not the job of this site. I think what you meant to say is that this site is not well served by addressing religion or politics. Generally, I agree, but there are many cases where the role of photography in our culture is relevant. Platon's crotch shots of Bill Clinton come to mind as an example, not to mention the educational role of documentary photography.
No better and no worse than the many, many depictions of lynching - utterly unremarked by conservative media - during the Obama administration. Hypocrisy breeds contempt and apathy.
I guess the downvoter thinks lynching images were perfectly appropriate.
Not a good guesser ....
Then explain why this is worse than images of President Obama being lynched, etc. Or, do you just not like my pointing out the hypocrisy of conservative media?
This is not a conversation where you make demands, I have no onus probandi with respect to you.
Ah yes, the pouting 4-year-old reply: "YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!"
Fine, I really have no interest in hearing what you have to say. Bye.
More off topic harassment.
What's off-topic is you calling Anderson Cooper a "fag". And if this is "harassment", why do you keep coming back for more?
Lol.
She's scarier looking than the head, but it was poor art direction. You use a comic, or caricature representation, not something that turns the stomach. Comedienne forgets to be funny: now Anderson Cooper has no fag hag for New Years ... boo hoo.
Klassy. Bigotry and misogyny all at once.
Bigotry is intolerance, of which I offer none. Misogyny is prejudice toward women, and again you fail basic English language comp because I simply judged what any person can see as a clear irony, and did it without without prejudice. (If you think Kathy is a lovely thing then say so.)
Your comment is appreciated for what it offers, as we all need to be reminded that lowest common denominator PC standards are the bane of intellectual endeavor. So thanks. Most glaring is that in your rush to rally PC sensibilities, you seem to not even understand my direct observation; that when comediennes are not funny, they fail. So you fail too.
"fag hag"
I rest my case.
You have to be dense to not understand Griffith & Cooper on New Years. A difference between you and I perhaps is that; I have had gay (and trans) friends and associates for over 40 years, and you seem to have learned (recently?) to be a PC crank and that's that. In the Big City terms that scare the uninitiated are part of the vocabulary, and appreciated for their linguistic/social value, and not determined by PC cranks. Speaking of linguistics, I never pointed out the ad hominem and therefore logically flawed nature of your replies, another matter altogether.
I can't help you, you need to get out more, practice writing for some years, read some books. Good luck.
"you seem to have learned (recently?) to be a PC crank"
Not a good guesser.
Just because you have gay friends doesn't mean you get to use the word "fag" in public without either being perceived as expressing, or actually engendering, animus against gays, just as I, a white guy, don't get to use the N word in public just because I have black friends and neighbors who use the term in private conversations.
You really don't understand how this whole spreading bigotry thing works. Keep saying "fag" in public and then be "shocked" when some bigot attacks one of your gay friends. Hypocrite.
Again with the unlearned ad hominem attacks, goodbye! PS that you are more than notionally friends with your Black neighbors might be reconsidered if you are having language rule difficulties with them, lol.
"Ad hominem: directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining"
The position you are maintaining is that it's just fine for you to use terms like "fag" in public. I am attacking that as derogatory hate speech that, whether you intend it or not, will encourage in others animus against gays, including your "friends". So, just cut it out.
Do the forum moderators have ANY policy about bigotry and hate speech??? This guy needs a language lesson.
Your off-topic harassment is what is against forum rules here.
What she did should cost her, her career, period!
I think people these days simple choose what offends them.... The most common comment I have read about this was that she is promoting violence ...every single day we watch movies, shows, which are full of blood, violence, murders and nobody cares and nobody feels offended ...not to mention other things like video games which are design to have fun by killing people.., again nobody feels offended... not to mentions there is so much known paintings around the world showing beheading people and people actually pay to get into museum to see those art pieces... again nobody feels offended ....I could go on and on about this.... Going back to this image ... I really don't understand why people are freaking out about this ... there is 795 million people worldwide who do not have enough to eat and don't have access to clean water and nobody cares... and the entire nation flip over a picture with some comedian with bloody mask...Seriously...???
It's called freedom of speech/ freedom of expression.
But on the flip side CNN has every right to fire her.
She's famous? Where?
Freedom of speech does not mean you have freedom of consequences. I say post all the photos of decapitated Presidents you want. It's your right (with Presidents...one may get a visit from Secret Service). However, companies, employers (in some cases), sponsors, paying public etc have the right to react with what they choose fits in their best interest as well.
Both sides have "goons". Yes, Obama, Bush, etc have had "wack jobs" post worse photos. However, those instances do not have the "consequences" as a public figure or employee of a high profile company.
Do I find it dis-tasteful...sure.....do I get offended? No.
Like it or not, there is no denying the power of an image.
She is a has been comedian desperately trying to get attention, sadly hitting bottom in the attempt; irreverence doesn't mean you have to be cruel and explicit
this is what happen when you get to work with a photographer that the inly thing that he have done in the industry is copy photography work of other famous photographers because he does not have what it takes to get creativity bad rep for this guy
Thumb up by mistake, I can't take it back:) So poorly written it makes one wonder.
I did not vote for Trump, but this is clearly a despicable photograph. I wasn't a fan of Obama, but was repulsed at all the burning dummies of him and the like. Like Patrick said, this was done by someone with a big following and a severed head made to look graphically real. Let's not be a nation that accepts something as barbaric as this as funny. I see a picture like this and my mind instantly thinks of videos and pictures of ISIS and the heartlessness of people that have no regard for human life. A people group that causally tortures and beheads innocent people as if it's as normal as drinking a cup of coffee in the morning is not something I would want our culture to resemble. Fortunately, it seems as though most people did not find it funny.
Saw the (uncensored) version, and thought 'Stupid! Who thinks of that crap?' Then I realized who was holding the "head," and I went - 'Ah. Of course...'
I definitely think this is in bad taste. BUT, it is EXACTLY what the 1st Amendment was written to protect. No need to protect speech that everybody agrees with; or that's so PC it doesn't offend anybody.
So, yes, definitely protected speech. Definitely should not open up anyone to "legal action" - now, that does not mean there should not be *CONSEQUENCES*; but no "punishment" for sure. Looking at the aftermath, I think Ms Griffin is feeling these consequences right now... And that is how it should be.
Griffin, unlike Alex Jones or Breitbart, does not incite actual physical violence or hate. She is a wildly inappropriate comedian who always has pushed the boundaries. Though I am no fan of Tyler Shield's plagiarism of other photographer's work, the image of someone holding a severed head has been a subject in art for millennia. I do not buy the special snowflake clutching of pearls that the mere image without Trump was inappropriate and something our delicate eyes should never glance upon. (below are classic images of Perseus with Medusa's head along with one of David with Goliath's) I also remain skeptical about the WH reports that an 11 year old Barron Trump thought this was reaL. Donald is always talking about how smart the kid is. There was not as much outrage when Ann Coulter was pleading for someone to assassinate Bill Clinton. There was no equivalent outrage with the multiple images and effigies created by the far right depicting a lynched President Obama, however unlike Griffin, they were not satirists and actually meant it. I personally think it is one of Tyler Shied's better and more original images. I am not shocked that Squatty Potty or other corporations would distance themselves from a spokesperson who went so political. However the image is good and appropriate political satire and commentary.
I agree. I think "The visual" has the most impact vs verbal "threats" etc. Right or wrong...I think we react differently to things we see. NFL player Ray Rice received a "mild" suspension for beating his wife...it was not until the Video surfaced that things got severe. Would have the LA Riots have occurred if there were no video of Rodney King being beaten over and over again? Probably not. I trust you are correct about Coulter-Alex Jones making threats or "suggestion" of such (don't really know-listen either one to be honest). If one of them held up a photograph with a gun to the head of a candidate, I think the reaction would have been much more fierce.
One more thing. Trump's son was just the typical "that shocked my children" reaction that everyone (left and right) does. I believe the wife of George Stephanopoluos (spelled wrong---news host on ABC) was stating that their daughter was worried about being raped or something along those lines after election. Just typical soundbite drama for the National Enquirer crowd. To be honest, I have lived thru quite a many elections and none of the Dooms day gloom (Reagan--nuke war, Clinton--socialist society, etc) has ever came to pass. But..critics of any current administration will tell you "This time it's true"
From simply a photographic point of view, Shields misses the boat completely (as does Griffin) in that the effort has absolutely zero context, and thus zero purpose.
She's holding up a head ... "OK", so what?
I get the overtly childish "shock" element to this photo, and I get the artists "right" to do their art ... but for a photograph that was released nationally, by two nationally known celebrities, the photo means absolutely nothing, has absolutely no context, and displays no overtones to imply artistry or intent.
No thought was put into the concept of the photo, and (like all photos that have no thought put into them) it translates into an uninteresting, ultimately pointless photograph.
On a personal note, I dislike Trump profoundly ... but this photo doesn't even remotely resonate with me on that level.
It's photographic crap.
It's getting to the point that Trump is too easy of a target for celebrities. There is nothing bold about picking on Trump, Jesus, etc. What was bold were the comic artists that drew the offensive comics featuring Mohammed a couple yeras back and had bounties on their heads. That was bold. Pretty much picking any person or tradition in the United States is pretty easy stuff IMO.
Am I the only one to remember, during the election, the meme (a composite) of Trump holding the head of Hillary as Medusa?
Being an Obama supporter and overall fan boy, this is what I thought immediately. If Obama had been depicted this way, I would have been furious! Then again, I've seen Obama depicted in ways that would curl your hair: in nooses, racially stereotypical caricatures, etc. But, either way, this depiction is wrong on its face. But, if anyone is outraged thinking Obama and past presidents haven't faced this, they either just landed on Earth or they need to dig a little deeper. And, BTW, karma's a bitch.