When Leslie wrote:
- "Ms. Greenberg is entirely clean in this"
- "Ms. Greenberg more than fulfilled her obligations to her client. I don’t have a problem with her making her own art on the side. As for how she has handled the press herself, I really don’t think that matters too much. She will be, at most, a blip in this election"
- "the act itself, I don’t think it’s half as bad as some think"
- "Read what I have written again–I have said that I don’t think what she did was wrong"
I thought that Leslie had gone off her rocker.
(Continued after the Jump)
Please read Leslie's posts - IN FULL - Greenberg; and when people began critisizing her position, penned "What I Represent"; and then again today "Creative Freedom". While she makes some relevant points in there, she maintains her positions on Greenberg - it seems.
Daryl Lang over at PDN, in his piece "Fallout From Jill Greenberg's McCain Images" asked "Who wants to come to Greenberg's defense?", and I doubt you'll get any takers, save for Leslie - and she's narrowed her defense and isn't wholly defending everything Greenberg has done. The extent to which I would defend Greenberg would be to say she had a right to make two setups, and license that image separately from her Atlantic work, provided it's within the parameters of the contract she signed. yet, that's where my defense ends. As I said in my first piece - "one for thee, one for me", is often the way a photographer tries out new styles, but that wasn't what Greenberg was doing. She appears to have had malice and forethought in her actions - and didn't leave it at that - she appears to have had malice and forethought in her statements to the press not only of McCain, but of her client.
I can't square all that with the position that Leslie has taken, and is maintaining - "I don’t think what she did was wrong."
What do you think?
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.