EXTRA CREDIT

1. The man was pushed into the tracks of the subway by trying to calm down a man harassing people walking by, but was then pushed by the man. The photographer claims he was trying to get the train to stop by flashing his flash on his camera at the driver, but it was too late, and he managed to get this photo of the man moments before his death.

2. The photographer claims he was trying to flash his camera flash at the train driver, and managed to obtain a photo of the man about to be run over in the process.

3. I don't think the photographer should have taken the photo in this instance. In this situation, If the photographer wasn't busy capturing the photo, he could have tried to lift the man from his imminent doom. I understand that it's their job to capture news, but this didn't really classify under that category, until the man was hit. He could have potentially tried to help him in this case, unlike in the "Falling Man" photo from the tragedy of 9/11.

4. The photographer did not do the best thing he could have done in this situation. He could have put his camera down and tried to save this man, instead of capture the likely preventable tragedy. It looks like, from the photo, he was the only person who could see this man in his moments of doom, and it's wrong that he'd rather watch a man die to get a "good" picture, then try and save him and potentially be a hero.

5. Since the damage of taking the photo was already done, they might as well run the photo to exploit the photographer for his moral character, or lack of it. 

6. To a photojournalist, capturing life as it happens is most important to them because that is their job. They don't alter reality to make something more interesting, as in a lot of fashion photographs. If they were to stop the "bad things" from happening, they wouldn't have a job.

7. I think it is ethically acceptable for a photographer to involve themselves in a situation they would normally photograph, if it means they could save another person's life. If it is a mass tragedy, like 9/11, I do not think it is wise then, but if it is involving one person and they could easily get them out of trouble, obviously they should help. That should just be the human instinct, to help others when in need.

8. If a photojournalist is trying to capture an event where no mortalities could take place, they should not alter the event. If the photojournalist is witnessing someone in trouble, and they are capable of helping, they should most definitely alter the event then, and busy themselves with photographing it. If they are capturing starving children in Africa or something along the lines of that, that is a different story because they can't do anything to help them from their possible doom, and they aren't watching someone die before their eyes, that they could've possibly prevented. In this situation of the man getting hit by the train, he could've at least tried to pull him up, instead of pulling his camera out of his bag and flashing it.

9.  I believe the most appropriate thing for a photographer to respond to people criticizing their choices in taking controversial photographs, like this one, is to just apologize and say it's their job. They shouldn't lie and say they tried to save them, when they obviously did not.