Check out the front page of today’s edition of USA Today. You’ll see this photo by Charlie Nye of the Indianapolis Star. The story is about how dependent the town of Kokomo, Indiana is on the automobile industry. I find it interesting that Nye chose to include a utility cyclist in the shot of downtown.
Having been a news photographer at one point in my journalism career, I can tell you that such a choice often comes down to opportunity. This street scene would look very empty and boring without some human element. That human element, in this case, could also be a person walking across the street. It may be that this is the first person who came by after a long wait.
And we don’t know what other pictures Nye took at this corner or in the downtown area. Journalism is about choosing among various representations of reality, a.k.a. editing. What is the reality we’re seeing here? The photo cutline reads: “Kokomo, Ind., has about 5,400 residents employed by Chrysler, and 3,100 by Delphi.”
Nye (and/or his editors) would have been looking for a shot that made a statement beyond simply showing the downtown. Pictures are supposed to tell stories, too. From a car-centric perspective, the cyclist in the snow is probably in economic distress. Why else would he on a bicycle in the snow in a town that’s vitally connected to the automobile industry?
We don’t know who this person is. Perhaps he is a cycling newbie in economic distress (clue: his lane position). Foregoing driving is certainly a good way to cut expenses. But what if he’s a fellow such as me? — one who owns a car, can afford to drive it, yet chooses not to.
My problem here isn’t with Nye or his picture. I’m wondering about journalistic intention. What bothers me is what that cyclist in the snow means to a car-centric culture and what stereotype it may be helping to create as we work our way through the current economic crisis.
Comments 7
Are you going to contact the editor to ask what was his journalistic intentions and the meaning of the cyclist?
Posted 11 Dec 2008 at 2:46 pm ¶I suspect that they are drawing upon a negative image of cycling: that it’s a last resort for those who can’t afford a car.
A picture of a guy riding a bike on a snow-covered street in a historic downtown, is probably meant to portray a city in economic distress.
Posted 11 Dec 2008 at 3:41 pm ¶Bob: No. I know what the response would be
Matt: Exactly.
Posted 11 Dec 2008 at 6:36 pm ¶I suspect that the photographer had no way of knowing that he perfectly explained how car oriented that town is.
Those of us in Columbia know that as the amount of educated and competent cycling increases the amount of wrong way riders decreases.
The key is educating the police force to understand that bicycles are vehicles and that vehicle operators driving outside of their lane is a serious traffic violation.
In cities where few bicycle and the police are uninterested in enforcing cycling laws you can have people ride like that for years.
Posted 11 Dec 2008 at 8:26 pm ¶Robert… I see this a lot in downtown Springfield. I’d say the mix is about 50-50 at the moment between integrated cyclists following the rules and folks acting as if the entire planet is one big surface for them to ride on in any way they please.
Posted 11 Dec 2008 at 9:58 pm ¶I remember the way perceptions changed when I got the Xtracycle on my bike: People in our car-centric town (A few kilometres from Mercedes and Porsche’s main factories) went from seeing some poor guy forced to use a bike, to “What’s that?” Now my status has changed because it’s obvious I’ve chosen to cycle, and not drive.
Now I’m an ‘Eco-wierdo’: you can’t have everything.
Posted 12 Dec 2008 at 12:57 am ¶Very observant. I think you’ve nailed this.
Posted 12 Dec 2008 at 9:42 am ¶