Jeffery Goldberg from The Atlantic Magazine is reporting that underhanded, leftist photographer Jill Greenberg has just been let go by her Representing Agency, the Vaughan Hannigan photo agency. This is a perfect example of a lesson of consequences. When Greenberg admitted that she lied and tricked John McCain so that she could manipulate his image to slander him and did so in the employ of The Atlantic Magazine, she lost any future work with that magazine for her unprofessional behavior. And now, more consequences have come her way.
No one is, of course, saying that Jill Greenberg isn't allowed to be as bigoted as she wants to be, but she should be ready to accept the consequences if she does so while acting as a representative for someone else. In this case she was representing The Atlantic Magazine when she was assigned to photograph McCain and then used her position to trick him into a situation where she could use his image for political attacks at a later date.
Goldberg reports from the inside:
The Vaughan Hannigan photo agency, which has represented the disgraced, excrement-obsessed photoshopper Jill Greenberg, has just dropped her from its client list. Bill Hannigan, who runs the agency, told me a few minutes ago that Greenberg and the agency had "different views on how to conduct business." He said he couldn't say anything more because he is "still sorting out some issues with Jill related to her contract."
Vaughan Hannigan has done the right thing, of course, and not only because it's best not to represent photographers who deceive their clients, but because the damage Greenberg has done to her fellow photographers is tremendous.
Well, Greenberg's unprofessional actions have led to the magazine saying it will no longer employ her and now her agent has also dropped her over her behavior.
She really does have every right to say whatever she wants about politics. And her agent and Atlantic Magazine have every right not to associate with her over her underhanded, unethical actions in pursuit of those political statements.
A perfect lesson that actions have consequences.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Hats Off..
September 18, 2008 - 03:48 ET by TakeaRightLet's give credit where credit is due. I'm not a fan of "The Atlantic" in the least, but they handled this professionally.
Well done.
At least they reacted
September 18, 2008 - 04:09 ET by Warner Todd HustonAt least they reacted rightly in the end. They could have done some more due diligence in not having hired her in the first place, as her views were fairly well known ahead of time. Still, they did the right thing in the end.
Not only that, Warner, but
September 18, 2008 - 06:12 ET by motherbeltNot only that, Warner, but didn't they see the photo before the mag was printed and distributed?
It looks to me like they were OK with the photo until the fit hit the shan over the photographer! Isn't that how this all started, with complaints about her deliberately trying to make McCain look evil in the cover photo?
mb,
September 18, 2008 - 07:41 ET by AgnosticThey were okay with the photo but they claim they did not realize that it was a deliberate attempt to make McCain look bad. They still support the photo and believe that not only is the photo a good shot of McCain but the story (which I have not read) is complimentary. It was the unknown manipulation and the photographers use of other photos that have them upset.
this is actually kinda
September 18, 2008 - 09:56 ET by TruthMongerthis is actually kinda bazaar to me - thousands of MSMer's are doing these same things every day without any repercussion - so why this particular photog is suddenly under a ton of bricks is beyond me - normally this kind of thing wins a pulitzer or whatever
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
under the rug
September 19, 2008 - 03:21 ET by AgnosticBecause she used her website to draw attention to the fact that "these same things" are happening every day. It becomes difficult to keep sweeping things under the carpet when people see the big lump. (In this scenario the part of the lump is played by a hack photographer)
Kudos
September 18, 2008 - 04:11 ET by DamianoAtlantic has earned new found credibility in my book. I still will not read or support their publications, however, at least they have shown a small degree of responsibility.
Now if they would accept similiar levels of accountability for their columnists and other contributors, especially Andrew Sullivan, perhaps they would eventually evolve into a respectable publication.
Now, how do we get CNN to begin to accept similar levels of responsibility for their constant slander and false reporting?
Damiano
September 18, 2008 - 04:59 ET by TakeaRightI agree about CNN. It's not just the slander and lies either. Didn't they once put an "X" over Dick Cheney and do a couple of other things that were clearly pranks by the 17-year-olds who work there and then say they were "techincal errors"?
If they would take action like "The Atlantic" did and fire the offenders, they might get just a bit of credibility back. (If it's possible to have credibility and Jack Cafferty at the same place.)
Will rise in the democrat party
September 18, 2008 - 05:06 ET by Blogger Guy00001Now that she's free, she will find "meaningful" work within the democrat party. She won't go hungry.
No worry
September 18, 2008 - 05:55 ET by Mica the MagnificentShe'll probably become the official White House photographer if Obama gets elected.
Obama: Can you make me look more Che? I need more Che!
Tangent: I recently
September 18, 2008 - 06:36 ET by KillgraveTangent: I recently visited a mall in a very "urban" area. Anyway, I came across a kiosk that was selling T-shirts, coffee mugs, etc. Side by side were T-shirts depicting Obama and Che. The juxtaposition was about as symbolic as it can get.
That sounds similar to the
September 18, 2008 - 06:47 ET by FairlightThat sounds similar to the famous 2 Live Crew record.
Now maybe Greenberg can title her next hate-project in memory of her old career: "As Bigoted As She Wants To Be."
Plus, I'm sure Rosie would purchase a few pieces -- after her own old career.
If you don't mind I'll wait a bit
September 18, 2008 - 07:27 ET by Calypso JonesI'm cynical enough and have seen enough outcomes to think that this is not what it seems.
Mearline
September 18, 2008 - 08:21 ET by MazziUnfortunately, I agree with you. It would be nice if we could count on her being blackballed, but in a world where Keith Olbermann and his ilk get promotions and pay raises, I suspect that this notoriety will get her more fame, jobs from the libs and an NEA-funded art show.
I love when my tax dollars pay for stuff like that! (psssssssst - McCain, could you please cut their funding first? Thx)
"When a government robs Peter to pay Paul, they can always count on the support of Paul." ~ George Bernard Shaw~
Photographers in general
September 18, 2008 - 07:34 ET by Hero SquadPhotographers in general should be furious about what Greenberg did. She managed to cast doubt on their profession. How can anyone know for sure that the photographer taking these photos won't surreptitiously turn around and use those photos for whatever nefarious purpose they wish.
We're not talking about paparazzi here; these are people who make their living convincing their subjects to do certain poses, trusting that they are doing so because it will make for a better photo.
I'll be interested to talk about this with the photographers I use for my publications and see if they are incensed by this (particularly the one who is an Obama supporter).
Photography organizations need to circle the wagons, call her out and make it clear what is appropriate and inappropriate, or they may start to lose public trust in their profession.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
She proved to everyone how
September 18, 2008 - 08:28 ET by kgShe proved to everyone how unprofessional she is!
Take it from the Hollywood crowd. You never mix your profession and politics, ever.
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
Cross
September 18, 2008 - 08:18 ET by MES41067Yep the leftist will put her up on the cross and she'll be a big big star.The only thing that would have made her a bigger hero would have been taking the villian of all villians picture BUSH.
naive
September 18, 2008 - 08:27 ET by MazziRemember though, McCain just recently realized that he is not the media's "darling" anymore. It must be a huge shock to him that his buddies, who pushed him to get the republican nomination were only doing that because they thought he couldn't beat Obama.
Truth be told, he probably couldn't have - PSP (pre Sara Palin). Die-hards would have voted for him to vote against Obama, but there would have been defectors. Now the defectors are from the other side.
It just goes to show that people ARE judged by the people they associate with. 'nuff said.
"When a government robs Peter to pay Paul, they can always count on the support of Paul." ~ George Bernard Shaw~
They were pretty quick to remove references of her...
September 18, 2008 - 10:36 ET by doodlebugThey were pretty quick to remove references of her from their web page. If you google "Vaughan Hannigan" you will see that Greenberg's name is still part of the metadata from that page but there is no reference on the actual viewable pages. Very funny....
That idiot doesn't care if
September 18, 2008 - 10:42 ET by marpelThat idiot doesn't care if she gets fired. She'll just find a left wing agency to get her "gigs". She's been canonized by her cohorts, so to me, there are no consequences for bad behavior.
It's just like in the corporate world. How many of you have seen bad behavior rewarded with a promotion? Same thing here...
She's no idiot
September 18, 2008 - 11:25 ET by Calypso JonesShe is a form of evil. And she is soulless. I may regret this but i can't think of any more evil people in the country at this time than these pro-obama, pro-abortion lying leftists and why is it that the women seem to be the worst.
Actions have consequences
September 18, 2008 - 11:15 ET by Tom1969caI'm sure Jill Greenberg knew her actions would have consequences. However, in all likelihood she believed the following consequences would occur:
Instead, she's unemployed.
There is a God.
=====
"There are some who use change to promote their careers, and then there are those who use their careers to promote change."
--Sarah Palin
She needs to get sued.
September 18, 2008 - 11:42 ET by attorneygirlThe Atlantic needs to sue her sorry ass.
Her behavior is completely unacceptable.
What does her contract read with the Atlantic? What does her contract read with her agency? Use those to sue her sorry unprofessional sleezy ass.
You can only hurt people by hitting them in the pocket book. Ask me, I know, I'm an attorney.
Wouldn't all photos
September 18, 2008 - 12:44 ET by Cape Conservativetaken at the request of The Atlantic Monthly for this article be the SOLE property of the magazine? I'm NOT an attorney, but it seems that should be the case. Of course, I'm just using common sense, not legalese.
Certainly her abuse of the pictures has inflicted "pain and suffering" on the magazine - its reputation has been tainted and you can be sure those on the list to be photographed will think twice or thrice before consenting!
Excellent.
September 18, 2008 - 13:37 ET by TheCynicGreat story. Frankly, she can probably make a lot of money as a sort of photography equivilent of a "shock jock" but she has no business doing so under the disguise of a reputable photographer working for a reputable company and reputable agent.
If she wants to go out there and be another Stephen Colbert and put on a whole disingenuous act as a professional schtick, hey, that's great, but magazines and clients need to know what they're getting.
All Ms. Greenberg has to do
September 18, 2008 - 16:29 ET by greenfairieAll Ms. Greenberg has to do is go on the NEA dole to fund her monkey poopin', baby-abusin' art and she'll be set for life.