In 1994, Time Magazine published on the front cover a 'darkened' mugshot of OJ Simpson.
The portrait showed a blurry, darkened, and unshaven Simpson. The original photo (a mugshot from the Los Angeles Police Department) was given to an artist, who was asked to interpret it. The credit line in the magazine also said, "Photo Illustration for Time by Matt Mahurin."
Newspapers, television, and people responded to the cover, saying that it made Simpson look more sinister, thus making Time guilty of racism. Others said it was poor editorial judgment. After looking into the issue, The New York Times wrote a response to the dilemma: "No racial implication was intended, by Time or by the artist."
Why do you think Time edited the photo in this way? Do you think they were trying to elevate the mugshot to 'art', or were they trying to portray OJ in a negative way? Do you think this was a racist action? Where do you draw the line between photo creativity and ethics? Is it ethical to put a mugshot on a magazine cover?
No comments:
Post a Comment