Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   oh god; c'mon!

   

   jdw242, Aug 11th, 2005 @ 1:39pm

   
   

   camera phone pictures? WTF?
   Would you buy a camera phone pic?
   I wouldn't; my camera phone pics suck compared to my DSC-M1.
   
   What did they (realistically) expect to happen?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Re: oh god; c'mon!

   

   Anonymous Coward, Aug 11th, 2005 @ 2:52pm

   
   

   well, sometimes even a cameraphone pic is better then nothin at all so they do have a potential money maker here. But lets face it, only in extreme situations like the problems in london last month when it wasnt even physically possible to get a trained camera man to the scenes. Most news items nowadays can easily have journos at the scene within mins so public pics are useless

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Re: oh god; c'mon!

   

   sighs, Aug 11th, 2005 @ 2:58pm

   
   

   I don't know where you live, but in the UK, when London got bombed at the beginning of July, all we saw for days on the news and in the papers were fuzzy cameraphone videos and equally low res snaps from smoke filled tube (sorry subway) tunnels and newly open top buses. You may scoff at the idea but half our police force is wading through gigabytes of this junk trying to find something useful to help fight the war on terror!

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Really Ugly People

   

   dorpus, Aug 11th, 2005 @ 3:26pm

   
   

   News crews pick photo-genic people on the street for their articles. I remember that immediately after 9/11, there was a picture of an ugly Southeast Asian woman using her cell phone on the sidewalk near the WTC, but later editions sliced out that part of the picture. I've seen the same thing happen at other natural disaster coverage, where they edited out footage of people that looked too ugly.
   
   
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment