City Bans Amateur Photographs of World Trade Center Site

TBO.com ^ | Sep 26, 2001 | Elisabetta Coletti

[Straight Vermonter]

NEW YORK (AP) - The gawkers who have gathered each day at the ruins of the World Trade Center have been banned from taking photographs or video of the scene. A statement from the mayor's office Tuesday said the ban was issued because the site is a crime scene. Officer Michael DiFrancisco, standing guard at a barricade, said the photo ban also was "out of respect for the families and all those concerned."

Mayoral spokeswoman Sunny Mindel said Wednesday that the ban does not affect news photographers.

"It doesn't affect anybody who is authorized. Obviously, a news organization, that's their job," she said. "What we've got is people on the site taking pictures, selling them, using it as a tourist site."

Despite that exception, several news photographers were turned away by police, and news organizations were working with authorities to make sure officers at the scene were clear on the policy. As of Wednesday evening, there were no reports of any arrests or seized equipment.

Signs were posted late Tuesday warning passersby that they risk prosecution if they take pictures or violate the ban on pedestrian or vehicular traffic or occupancy of buildings in the cordoned-off area.

More than 6,300 people are missing and feared dead in the rubble. Since the day after the Sept. 11 attack, no survivors have been pulled out.

Bill Homan, standing two blocks from the twisted metal and concrete, said he was going to take pictures anyway.

"That's a phenomenal picture," said Homan, 27, a Staten Island history teacher. "In 20 years I could say, 'Yes, I've seen that. I have pictures from that day.'"

[Straight Vermonter]

Anyone else having a hard time buying this explanation?

[Alberta's Child]

Something doesn't sound right here. Since when does the "official" media have an exclusive right to cover events in a public place like this?

[gg188]

This should get some comments here on FR. And I'll be interested to hear them.

[SheLion]

I heard on MSNBC today that the reason they put up the tarp, is because it's getting to the gory stuff. They are now finding the bodies, and the smell is horrible from decay. They are finding bodies and parts of bodies, and they don't want the general public taking photos of this.

[hinj]

I would have to doubt the constitutionality of such a ban. Yes, taking pictures and making it a "tourist site" is in extremely poor taste...but hardly an offense to prosecute.

[vbmoneyspender]

it's called prior restraint and it is unconstitutional.

[SunStar]

I don't approve of morbid curiosity but all the gory stuff is over.

The gory stuff is far from over. They have started finding many bodies and body parts. Giuliani and the media don't want the public to see the carnage. It's called censorship. And New Yorkers want this guy to find a (legal) way around term limits?

[monkeywrench]

Maybe this and the car riders edict will jog peoples memories about some of the other high handed edicts to come from rudy.

[vbmoneyspender]

It would be nice if gov't officials had a little more faith in the public than they are evidencing here. All they have to do is explain why they don't want people taking pictures (i.e. out of respect for the people who lost loved ones) and the general public will police themselves. We've already seen this with people and companies refusing to fly the flag and then being shamed by their fellow citizens into doing the right thing. I am confident that the exact same thing would happen with people who are taking pictures of the site if they attempted to take gruesome pictures of the dead and then somehow exploit the death and carnage that they had captured on film.

More generally though, I think it is crucial that a public record exist of what happened to the people at the WTC Towers. Although the carnage that occurred there was on a much smaller scale than what happened during the Holocaust, I want there to be a complete record of the horrific massacre that occurred there so that people will never be able to forget or deny what was done to our country on 9/11/01.

[Woodman]

Rudy is a little tyrant. That is why he was so good for an out of control NYC. Now his time is up, the next one will screww it up again and in 4 years we will see a shift to the right in city politics. The shame of it is that although I look forward to the future I have to live through the interim.

[glory]

I'm with you. I want a record of t his and the first ones I want to see the pics are the peace"mongers". Let them see the carnage that they think was "ok" because Bin Laden had gripes. I think it should be burned in the minds of Americans, particularly pacifists, just like those two planes going in and the buildings collapsing are. I personally don't need to see the horror of the bodies to know the reality and what needs to be done, I think others however need this reality check.

glory

[giotto]

It struck me as strange that no photographs were being allowed. I want to see the mangled, charred remains. And I am the kind of person who closes her eyes at all gory scenes in movies. I hate violence and can't even stand to squash a bug. But this is different. We need to see what those monsters have done. The anti-war idiots need to have these images thrust in their faces. We need these images, so that we NEVER FORGET.

The "crime scene" bit just doesn't wash.

[Dale 1]

"out of respect for the families and all those concerned."

All 280 million of us? Yes, I have a problem with this!

[F16Fighter]

The Politically Correct censors have struck again.

We can't have anyone's "sensitivities" insulted by actually documenting the by-product of horror now, can we? But, if you're an "accredited" photog with the Inquirer it's ok.

[Mr_Magoo]

Posted this morning.

[GretchenEE]

I've got a HUGE problem with this. HUGE.

The very openness of our society has always been one of its largest strengths. Crime scene photos taken by others have previously proven to be useful to one side or the other. This doesn't wash. Are the powers that be going to ban the Zapruder video of JFK's assassination now? ABC says they won't play the videos of the crashes unless it is "integral to the story" (when is it NOT integral to "the story"? ... Where does this end?

[DC Ripper]

We rightly documented the horrors of Nazi concentration camps. Why should this be different? This must not stand.