Ethical question

[altivo]

From a non-LJ friend:

This test has only one question, but it's a very important one. By giving an honest answer, you'll discover where you stand morally.

It's a completely fictitious situation but you'll need to make a decision that's honest yet spontaneous.

You are in New Orleans. There's chaos all around you due to a hurricane with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are a photojournalist for a major newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're attempting to shoot career-making photos. There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing under the water. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.

Suddenly you see a man floundering in the water. He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer, somehow he looks familiar.

You suddenly realize who it is.

It's George W. Bush!

At the same time, you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under.....forever. You have two options: you can save the life of G.W. Bush

or ...

you can shoot a dramatic, Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting the death of one of the world's most powerful men.


So, here's the question--and please give an honest answer ...

Would you select high contrast color film, or would you go with the classic simplicity
of black and white?

Comments

[calydor.livejournal.com]

Black and white, definitely.

I prefer color photos myself by default, however, having the last ever picture of GWB in black and white would be quite the statement, signifying how his world was always black or white, right to the end.

[hellmutt.livejournal.com]

Yep, I like your answer!

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I do too, though I admit my first inclination was to say "To hell with the expensive camera, I'd bash him in the head with it to hurry things along."

[corelog.livejournal.com]

Ha. Ha.

[chrissawyer.livejournal.com]

Black and white. It would show the details of the demonic faces in the frothing water much better.

[soreth.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'd save him.

But the picture I take of him throwing up and gasping for air on the bank of the river will be digital.

[pokeypony.livejournal.com]

I would put dowm my camera and save him,cuz it dosent matter who it is,or what my personal feelings for him are,but he is a life,and thats what matters in Gods eyes.

So moraly the right thing to do is not hate the person for what they do,but hate the things they do and hope or pray they change.

In that case,if the G.W came that close to death,I think he would change,because most people do.

And I also think the only thing worse than bush running the country would be his vice president *DICK* taking his place.

[kyhwana.livejournal.com]

Well, if you're christian, that's your duty, but if you're not, (and not a republican) hey, game on!

[kyhwana.livejournal.com]

Oh I'm taking that shot!

[kyhwana.livejournal.com]

Oh, and in colour too. You can always turn it black and white later on.

[lobowolf.livejournal.com]

Hmm, that's a difficult situation. I was going with black and white, but then, yes, it is easily enough to shoot colour and then convert it to black and white.

[lobowolf.livejournal.com]

Although this would be a highly unlikely situation, becuase he'd be observing the disaster from his safe bunker in Colorado.

[moose-93395.livejournal.com]

Color film.. to catch the red gleam in his eyes. :P