I agree 100% with your position of NOT publishing a picture (or pictures) of a fatal accident.

I do NOT however agree that those pictures should be trashed. A death is in vain if change does not result. Pictures provide accurate documentation of an event. Adrenaline does funny things to eye witnesses. It makes them see things that didn't happen and miss things that do. Pictures are far more accurate. Pictures during or at the conclusion of an accident can provide invaluable information to authorities and engineers that can result in changes to make safety improvements. I would encourage all photographers (professional or amateur) to offer your photos of a fatal racing accident to the authorities, safety organizations, (Impact, Simpson, etc) and tracks in the effort to make changes to improve the safety of our sport.

I don't know if theres a rule or not. But I think the main one to follow is RESPECT both for the Victim and the family and friends. Several weeks out if the video or photos appeared it wouldn't be so hurtfull but a reminder of what was lost.

Doing so immediately, Or at least before a funeral is at Minimum. A slap in the face of those already suffering.

Photos can be a very valuable tool in documenting. AND PREVENTING further injuries or deaths. They can also be very hurtfull if not done the right way and not just for A SCOOP.

It's part of the sport. Period. If it wasn't, then anybody could do it and nobody would watch. Do what you think is right with "your" pictures/videos but, don't criticize others who disagree with you. My first Indy 500 was 1964. I was 9 years old. We were sitting at the south end of Stand J in turn four and the Sachs/McDonald crash occurred right dead in front of us. It was a tragic, yet, historic moment. It was an incredibly powerful moment in my young life. I'm glad that it has been memorialized and that I can, on occasion, call it up and share with a friend what I experienced that day. If you think that's macabre, maybe it is. It's a natural human instinct to be somewhat intrigued by the subject/event of death. If you deny it, you are more than likely lying to yourself and us. But, it sounds good (your "unwritten rule", that is).

I'm 60 years old. It's not just "today's society". It's always been that way, in my lifetime.

My natural instinct is to stop shooting when a bad looking crash finishes (obviously you cant tell how bad a crash might be till its over). The worse it looks the less I shoot.

My gut says dont shoot... then I'll come home and watch a dvd by someone as respected as Dick Wallen which [IIRC] has fatal and vivid crashes with open cockpit/no cage fatalities etc! (correct me please if I am wrong on this?)

Also, I have less of a problem with true race fans, that follow the sport or may even have seen this person race or even talked to them in the pits; As opposed to just two dudes sharing a pic of a guy dying in a race car crash.

I the timing is important.

Cecil98, I agree with most everything you said the danger is part of the allure of our sport , and it is nature aspect of our human psyche to be intrigued by death. I'll even go as far as to say that the ever prevalence of death is what makes what we do in life beautiful.
However the way in which we present that as media is something that needs to be handled with a code of ethics,
I have no problem with someone hanging on to photos, or discussing something that happened with friends, it's when someone post information or images that are available to all without regard to audience. This doesn't apply to fans just media or staff who have been granted addition privileges of access, information needs to flow through the correct channels.

I could discuss this to day's end but a professor I had in a journalism class told me "that 99% of what you do in this field will be exceedingly easy, so easy that almost anyone can do it, it's the other 1% that separates the professionals from amateurs" a situation of a severe injury death is one of those 1% instances. In my opinion any information other than so and so was injured and transported should come from the family or come at the discretion of the family of the injured party.

Pete Smith
Staff Writer luvracin.com
Ohio_openwheel on twitter
Buckeye_openwheel on Facebook

Posted via Mobile Device

A picture or video of the wreck I can handle. But a picture or video of the person laying dead or dieing after the wreck is a definite NO! For me anyways.

Pete, Very thoughtful post and I appreciate your response. I don't "think" I can disagree with much of anything you wrote. I do have a question that might bring to me, though, more clarity in your opinion. I'll use several examples: Bill Vukovich Sr., Swede Savage, Sachs/McDonald, Gordon Smiley and Greg Moore. These were all fatals that have been memorialized and can be found and viewed online. The question is, are you OK with these being available for the public to view, or, do you believe they should be pulled and never viewed by the public again? I value your opinion and this is an honest question searching for an honest opinion. I look forward to your response. Thanks! Craig

Mark Dismore's crash at Indy was similar to Smiley's, but Mark survived, I just happened to be there when Sach's and McDonald crashed, and still have an 8mm reel of it, somewhere, I know where it is, but I am not going to view it anymore, I never even took it out of the camera. Sometimes, nothing will help, other times, you just go on, I still am not sure if I would "mandate" any particular safety device, some folks think that is a guarantee of safety, but try explaining that to a judge and jury, arm restraints, belts, and a helmet/neck support should be the minimum, as well as the heat related items, but IMHO a Hans device, without a helmet support, and tethers so loose you can look beside you, aren't any better than the least you can get by with, which makes me wonder about the judge and jury aspect. Bob