Liberia imposes media restrictions on 'invasive' Ebola coverage

[Pathfinder]

Liberia imposes media restrictions on 'invasive' Ebola coverage

By Bate Felix1 hour ago

DAKAR (Reuters) - Journalists will need official permission to cover many aspects of the Ebola outbreak in Liberia, under new rules that the government said aimed at protecting patient privacy.

The move was announced on Thursday, the day an American cameraman working for NBC News in Liberia became the first foreign journalist to test positive for Ebola. There was no indication that the new rules were related to that case.
...
Journalists could be arrested and prosecuted if they fail to get written permission from the health ministry before contacting Ebola patients, conducting interviews or filming or photographing healthcare facilities, officials said.

"We have noted with great concern that photographs have been taken in treatment centers while patients are going in to be attended by doctors. That is invasion of the dignity, privacy and respect of patients," Tolbert Nyenswah, assistant minister of health and head of Liberia's Ebola Incident Management System, said.

"Ebola patients are no different from any other patients. We should do that (report) under permission so that we don't just take pictures or send out stories of naked people (in a way) that does not respect their privacy," he said.
...
https://news.yahoo.com/liberia-impo...asive-ebola-coverage-133629299--business.html

 

[Dani]

Re: Liberia imposes media restrictions on 'invasive' Ebola coverage

I do agree that many of the photos I've seen are violations of patient privacy- some of the pictures from the short-lived West Point facility come to mind. On the other hand, they did vividly illustrate the plight of the people there, and might have had a great impact on those who have decided to help in the fight against Ebola.

However, the restrictions in this directive are too severe to chalk up to patient privacy concerns alone. To me, it seems that the government in Liberia is trying to hide the fact that things are utterly out of control.

Furthermore, our troops are over there. If there is a ban on photography of medical facilities, then it will hamper the ability of the media to cover what is happening with them. I don't have a good feeling about this. It's very much what one would expect from North Korea, not a supposed democracy.

 

[GardenSpider]

Re: Liberia imposes media restrictions on 'invasive' Ebola coverage

I do agree that many of the photos I've seen are violations of patient privacy- some of the pictures from the short-lived West Point facility come to mind. On the other hand, they did vividly illustrate the plight of the people there, and might have had a great impact on those who have decided to help in the fight against Ebola.

However, the restrictions in this directive are too severe to chalk up to patient privacy concerns alone. To me, it seems that the government in Liberia is trying to hide the fact that things are utterly out of control.

Furthermore, our troops are over there. If there is a ban on photography of medical facilities, then it will hamper the ability of the media to cover what is happening with them. I don't have a good feeling about this. It's very much what one would expect from North Korea, not a supposed democracy.

Great points Dani. Speaking as a photographer having worked for years in Africa, I found that African governments are very easily embarrassed by what we photograph, film and find interesting. Governments want to be taken seriously and very often restrict photography and filming in a desperate attempt to ban certain images from public consciousness and scrutiny. This is an attempt to control their image quite literally and hide things that don't make them look good.

The rule in the US is: Anyone in the public domaine can be filmed and photographed without their permission. Within a facility where privacy issues are concerned, we are required to obtain either a release or blur peoples' faces so they can't be identified. This always applies to minors.

In Africa, governments often require permission to film or photograph as a means to extort fees which can be ridiculously excessive, sometimes well over $100,000 for film crews, even small ones. For individuals it's about $200 but officials can raise it to whatever they want, depending on what they think you can afford. The claims are that the fees are applied to fund something specific, but most of the time, it's people just lining their own pockets. Remember most people with jobs may earn only $50 month: sometime a little more, most often less. This kind of "tax" targets westerners - all whom are perceived as being wealthy- who come into their country with equipment that looks fancy and expensive. In my experience, they see that and want a piece.

 

[Graupel]

Re: Liberia imposes media restrictions on 'invasive' Ebola coverage

I think there's an important line between photos that highlight how severe things are (which are impt to get some true action) versus exploitation and dehumanization of people in staggeringly dire situations. I don't pretend to know where that line is, but several photos have crossed it, IMHO.

 

[GardenSpider]

Re: Liberia imposes media restrictions on 'invasive' Ebola coverage

I think there's an important line between photos that highlight how severe things are (which are impt to get some true action) versus exploitation and dehumanization of people in staggeringly dire situations. I don't pretend to know where that line is, but several photos have crossed it, IMHO.

Very true: Unfortunately a few individuals behind the cameras are sometimes prone to those extremes and it makes it harder for the rest of us doing more balanced work to earn back trust both from the people and the nation. That said, fees are often imposed for personal gain by the officials collecting them, which makes it harder to collect the images that will show the world what's going on in the region.