U.S. Media, Embedding Criticized At Perpignan

PERPIGNAN, France--Perpignan has always been a breeding ground for controversy, and this year was no different. For much of the week, the American media seemed to be on trial. Attendees at the festival complained that American TV backed the war on Iraq without question, and print publications basically bought the administration's party line that this was a war of liberation, not an illegal war of occupation, as many here expressed.

Frustrations with the American media reached its peak at a panel discussion Saturday afternoon. Though the discussion was designed to debate the practice of embedding journalists with military units during the war in Iraq, it quickly turned into an indictment of the American press.

The panel consisted of AP photographer Jerome Delay, who was stationed in Baghdad during the American bombardment; Gamma's Laurent Van der Stockt, in Iraq on assignment for The New York Times Magazine; VII's Gary Knight, on assignment for Newsweek and traveling as a unilateral with U.S. marines; and VII's Chris Anderson, on assignment for US News & World Report and the only photographer on the panel who was officially embedded with a military unit.

The question of censorship came up early and often, though the consensus was that it came more from the magazines back home than the military commanders in the field. "No single photographer can completely cover a war, so we rely on those back in New York or Paris [to show the public a fair view]," Knight said. The feeling from the panel was that the work they submitted wasn't what the editors in Europe and the U.S. expected to see.

Knight admitted his most interesting work was not published in Newsweek, which he explained was partly due to timing and deadline issues. When later asked if his pictures were not published because they were perceived as anti-American, Knight went further.

"I think there was a feeling in America that this was an experience of liberation," Knight said. "This clearly wasn't my experience, and I think [editors] were a bit confused by that."

Suggesting that pictures had to be patriotic, Knight said the American media didn't ask enough tough questions about the conduct of American troops during the war.

Given the tone of questioning from the audience, it would have been more informative to have a couple of photo editors on the panel, not to mention another embedded photographer. As the only American on the panel, and the only official embed, at times it seemed as if Anderson himself was on trial. Though he acknowledged the personal ties embedded journalists have with soldiers can color their reporting, he said it's a challenge all journalists face whenever they spend a lot of time with a subject. Anderson also said the Pentagon's conditions -- such as placing a hold on pictures of casualties until victim's families can be notified, and the prohibition on giving away troop positions -- were mostly reasonable.

When Anderson suggested that those in Baghdad who photographed injured civilians on tours organized by Iraqi censors were just as "embedded" as those traveling with the military, things got a bit tense.

"Whatever war and whatever side you cover, you're always embedded," Anderson said.

"At least we didn't have to sign a piece of paper," Delay snapped back.

Most of those present, including the audience members, seemed to view the embedding process with suspicion. Towards the end, Van der Stockt made an observation that no doubt many in attendance believe was the Pentagon's plan all along.

"Never before have we seen so many pictures and understood so little about a conflict," he said.

Other debates overflowed each night into the bars and cafes of Perpignan. One popular topic was the nightly projections. The three-hour slide shows, held each evening of the festival, highlighted wars and famines in Africa, corporate crimes in India and Spain and humanitarian crises in Asia. Occasionally, softer topics were shown, and most of those were well-received. But for the most part, the program stuck to news and features not extensively covered by mainstream media.

Thursday night's slideshow was one of the strongest, but also one of the most controversial. Before presenting three different viewpoints on the Israeli/Palestinian war, Visa director Jean-Francois LeRoy addressed the crowd [complete transcript]. LeRoy started with a quote from Eugene Smith, who said the one word he would most like to eradicate from journalistic legend was the term "objectivity."

"While impartiality is the ultimate goal which we should all strive to attain, honesty is the surest way of getting there," LeRoy said. Responding to critics who viewed last year's program as anti-Israeli and anti-American, LeRoy went on to note that while he's critical of Sharon and Bush, in no way does that make him anti-Semitic or anti-American. Still, several people surveyed felt LeRoy saying one thing and presenting another.

The first reportage shown was from Kadir Van Lohuizen, a Dutch photographer for L'Agence Vu. Van Lohuizen's projection showed both Israeli settlers and Palestinians living on opposite sides of the wall Israel is building to separate the two factions. Van Lohuizen's wide shots and close-up portraits showed the two groups in and around their homes, with audio interviews explaining their thoughts on the wall and the ongoing conflict. The Israelis mainly came across as wealthy, bigoted people who at best view the Palestinians who often work for them as the primary obstacle to peace. The Palestinians, in contrast, were largely seen as victims of Israeli abuses. Though this presentation angered a good chunk of the audience, others felt it was an accurate portrayal.

For the grand finale of the presentation, LeRoy asked two photographers, one Israeli and one Palestinian, to submit the best of their work from the past year. First up was Reuters photographer Ahmed Jadallah, a Palestinian who was recently shot and severely injured by Israeli soldiers. LeRoy said Jadallah and Reuters only sent in one type of picture, that of Palestinians as innocent victims, and the presentation showed that and only that.

On the other hand, Ziv Koren, an Israeli photographer working for Polaris, sent in a more varied view of the conflict. Koren submitted around 180 pictures, about 60 of which were used, showing both Israelis and Palestinians as innocent victims, but also pictures of daily life and portraits of political leaders. After seeing the projection, which Koren did not get to preview, the photographer was disappointed that none of his pictures showing Israelis blown up by Palestinian suicide bombers made the slideshow.

"I was surprised to see that the slideshow was not balanced," he said, trying his best to sound diplomatic. "Over the last year, I've shot six or seven major bombings in Israel. I have extremely strong pictures of Israelis being victims, and [the projection] just did not show that. Not even a single image, which I thought had to be there to balance the projection of Ahmed Jadallah.

Jadallah did not attend the festival. When pressed to explain why Koren's pictures showing Israeli bombing victims were omitted from the projection, LeRoy grew defensive.

"I wanted to make a debate between Ziv Koren and Ahmed Jadallah," LeRoy explains. "I know Ziv Koren is not happy, but to be really honest I asked him to send me pictures from [only the Israeli] side."

LeRoy's explanation is a bit confusing, since he says he asked Koren to send the Israeli point of view, yet Koren claims that's exactly what was edited out. LeRoy said the photographers, not his editing, shaped the two presentations. "Someone shouldn't say I asked for this, because that's what [Koren] sent in the first place," LeRoy said.

When explaining his political views further, LeRoy called the wall an affront to humanity. "If W Bush allows this [wall] to happen, knowing he's creating a population of terrorists, then yes, I'm pro-Palestinian," LeRoy said. "When you're a baby born behind the wall, and your only hope is to blow yourself up in a pizza parlor or disco in Jerusalem, I find this regretful. I really do."

Several attendees complained that the projections are too narrowly defined by one political viewpoint, while suggesting that the festival's program could benefit from a rotating cast of outside curatorial experts.

Talk often turns to LeRoy, the man many see as the final arbiter of the festival, for better and for worse. Some would like to see a little more leeway from LeRoy: "He tries his best to antagonize his American friends," one New York-based agent said. "It's his way or the highway."

While others just view him as furthering the debate between the American and French worldviews: "Jean-Francois LeRoy reflects the public opinion of the French public," says legendary photo editor John Morris, now a Democratic activist living in Paris.

Love it or hate it, now in its 15th year, Visa pour L'Image cannot be ignored.