Snapping the Dead Pope on a Camera Phone

[Jerry Raia]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4415947.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4415947.stm</a><br /><br /></div><i>"They have come to pay their final respects, so is taking a mobile phone picture of the Pope's body disrespectful or just a sign of how times changed during his 26-year papacy? To some it is distasteful, inappropriate and plain disrespectful. To others it is recording an historic moment to share with those who cannot be there."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/images/pope.jpg" alt="User submitted image" title="User submitted image"/><br /><br />This of course raises the issue of when camera phone use is appropriate and when it might not be. Since the entire event is on television anyway I would have to ask what is the difference when a person takes a picture with a phone?

[Kevin Daly]

While I'm uncertain about this myself, I believe there is a clear distinction: live coverage of any event is for better or worse a way of sharing that event with a broader section of the population than would otherwise be possible.
Taking snapshots of someone's dead body on the other hand seems a bit like taking trophies, like lopping a bit off the corpse as a souvenir.

However I'm not really sure how I would feel about this if I were physically present somewhere where it was taking place. Perhaps it wouldn't seem disrespectful in context (depending I suppose on the overall behaviour of the people who were doing it)...or maybe it would seem much worse than it does at this remove.

I have found over the years that my response to what I see with my own eyes tends to be more visceral...but now I'm rambling so I'll shut up.

[Pony99CA]

"They have come to pay their final respects, so is taking a mobile phone picture of the Pope's body disrespectful or just a sign of how times changed during his 26-year papacy? To some it is distasteful, inappropriate and plain disrespectful. To others it is recording an historic moment to share with those who cannot be there."

This of course raises the issue of when camera phone use is appropriate and when it might not be.
No, it raises the question of when any photography is appropriate. Does it matter if the user takes a picture with a camera phone, a dedicated digital camera or a film camera? I don't think so.

Personally, I think taking photographs of a corpse is a bit distasteful (unless you're a crime scene investigator), but if photojournalists are allowed to photograph the body, I can't see why we should prohibit spectators from doing the same.

Steve

[encece]

Thats the distinction...photographers and video journalists have been given permission to photograph. They dont have their cameras right in the pope's face. They're at a respectable distance.

This is just sickening and shouldnt have been allowed. Simply Disgraceful.

[xultar]

I think you're all forgetting that they announced the death of the Pope via SMS and email.

Let's not be such stuffed shirts on this. A camera is a camera is a camera, whether it is attached to a phone or not.

The Vatican didn't say that cameras were not allowed. So whether it is a $5000 nikon SLR , a $250 cannon digital easy shot, or a SMT 5600 they have one thing in common. They are cameras.

So, some think taking pictures of a corpse is a little weird. I can understand but the venue and it's organizers own the domain on whether or not cameras of any type are allowed.

Personally I don't like taking or seeing photos of dead people. But If I did I wouldn't stand in a line like the one for the Pope with a whole bunch of junk. I'd want only what I need, water, some fruit, a coat, an umbrella, and my cameraphone with an extra battery.