Is this Photo Ethical?
It seems counterintuitive that photographers have no emotion or remorse. This article displays an award winning photo by Paul Hansen. The photo shows a dead little girl, shot by police. However, when another photo published by Nathan Weber shows a bunch of photographers acting like “vultures” in order to capture a picture of a dead little girl. All seem to be trying to get the best version of the imagine, and just ignoring the horrible crime that just occurred.
These photographers showed no regards for this girl at all. All seem emotionally detached from the situation, and show no remorse at all. Even more pictures surfaced from this situation. Some even showing the girl laid in different positions in order to capture the prefect snap shot. The objects under her were even moved a little, along with her arms and head. These photographers do travel the world and work hard at their crafts, but there are boundaries and certain situations that don’t need to be photoed.
MultiVitamins
It seems counterintuitive that purchasing vitamins actually doesn’t benefit you, it just hurts your pockets and even your health. The industry collects over 700 million in annual sales. There is virtually no evidence that suggests “healthy people get healthier” with the consumption of vitamins. Spending all this money on these vitamins is basically a waste as the average American gets their recommended amount of nutrients in a day. It’s not hard to exceed recommended daily limits for certain vitamins and minerals, and in some instances can be dangerous when going over the recommended amount. For seniors, who usually get all the iron they need from fortified rice, cereals, and sliced breads, a multi with iron can increase the risk of heart disease. Even pregnant women who pop standard amounts of multi containing retinol form of Vitamin A can be at risk to birth defects.
Surviving the Shower
It seems counterintuitive that showers can in fact kill. For an old person who years might be limited, slipping in the shower is a big risk for them. Falls a common cause for older people. Some may think what’s the risk of falling in the shower. Its odds of maybe one in a thousand. However, us as people exaggerate the risks of events that are beyond our control, that cause many deaths at once or that kill in spectacular ways such as gunman, terrorists, or even planes crashes. But at the same time we underestimate the risks in everyday life that we can control. We just say, “Oh that would never happen to me.” Or “I’m always careful.” In essence, we as people need to stop underestimating the the risks of daily life and be aware. This doesn’t mean live in fear, but be aware and be careful.
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Kaboom, I find the best way to proceed with feedback on these 3-part posts is to do a detailed response to the first of the three entries and give you a chance to incorporate my advice into revisions for all three. I hope that works to your advantage and that you’ll take the opportunity to revise. I warn you in advance, I can be REALLY picky (because the details can sink your persuasiveness; you know this). Here goes.
Is this Photo Ethical?
—It doesn’t actually. Or at least it doesn’t as you’ve phrased it. It would seem counterintuitive that a doctor whose clear intention was to cure his patient would give him poison. But we don’t automatically assume that photographers are emotional. Can you phrase your opening to highlight an obvious and unexpected contradiction?
—There’s actually more of an obvious contradiction here than in your first sentence. What is it about grisly photos of dead girls shot by police that qualifies them to win awards?
—Grammatically, this is a fragment, not a sentence. Both “However” and “when” create dependency in your clause, requiring it to be attached to an independent clause. If you need help with this, please ask. It’s an essential writing skill. Factually, you don’t really establish the scene. I know what you’re saying only because I’m familiar with the subject matter. But you’re obligated to provide unfamiliar readers with the needed background. Are the vultures shooting the same girl? Is Hansen one of them?
—Together with the first sentence in your paragraph, these three say the same thing four times.
—You appear to be accusing the photographers of posing the girl and her “props.” If you are, you’ve uncovered something truly counterintuitive. It’s hard enough to understand how human beings can set aside their emotions well enough to perform their professional function of taking pictures of a dead or dying girl. We send them into trouble spots to do that for us. We demand photographs to help us understand what happened. But if they were posing their subject, they weren’t even telling the actual truth any more. They were arranging it.
—I appreciate your sensitivity to this situation. Do you object to the photos? Or to the callous disregard for the girl’s death? Or to the “arranged” shot? Or to the fact that we award such photos with prizes? There’s a lot here to tease out.
I hope this helps you consider revising all three of your Summaries, Kaboom.
Feedback is a conversation.
If I don’t receive a response to this Reply, and especially if you don’t revise your Summaries, I’ll conclude that feedback is not valuable to you, which is OK. The choice will always be yours.
Talk to you soon, I hope! 🙂
Thank you for the feedback, I will find time to revise these summaries.
None yet, I see. First grade has been posted. Consider revising. This is a rewriting course.