The Editor and the Mayor

The Editor of the newspaper I worked for saved the life of the then

Mayor when she choked on a morsel of food at a Mayoral Banquet by

quickly noticing what had happened and applying the Heimlich

Manoeuvre.

 

Next day they both decided that in the general interest of the public

that the story should be published with a pic of them demonstrating

how the manoeuvre is applied.

They did this in the press room in to much merriment from the

journalists working there and insisted that I take the image, which I

as staff photographer and ordered to do so by my boss, had to oblige.

 

Of course after taking several different poses, I suggested that a

nice peck on the cheek would also be appropriate, and of course the

peck on the cheek was run on the next days front page.

 

The other images were presented to the editor at various editorial

staff functions.

At first glance, I thought they were shagging.

lol. :)

 

Albert.

No wonder they are both smiling!

 

Oh dear. - I see some of your raters have had a sense of humour failure. Well thanks for sharing it made me smile!

Nice one Erin... ;)

lol. Made me look twice! Good job! 6/7

Office relations are so funny sometimes. Like two insects, same facial expressions, almost same glasses, as if caught in the middle of something. (I pretend I haven't read your explanation till now.) That's really incongruous, Erin ! Because half funny - funny and serious at the same time (what I've noticed in some of your other photos). They are serious people and they are afraid the public could misunderstand them, so they're smiling awkwardly trying to say "It's not true what you're thinking about, we're serious people!". We know, it's not an easy task to make serious people play funny games. They are too self-conscious. The viewer could be totally confused if not the laughing lady to the right. From the other hand, however, doing funny things seriously is an old trick. And now I'm reading your comment. Ridiculous! :-) Regards. Blago

newspaper (not for one), but the AP bureau I worked at had its office next door to two small-town newspapers--one was fiercely independent, and the other was more a lackey of its advertisers, town government published press releases without checking facts.

 

In such small towns between parties who knew each other, relations were often so 'intimate' they bordered on 'incestuous', not least between the 'advertisers' and the 'editorial' department for the least repectful of those two newspapers.

 

At one newspaper, this photo might well have been emblematic if only the rolls were reversed and it were the mayor behind the editor and the title were "Driving a Point Home" about editorial policy, for it certainly looks like that's what he's doing -- driving a point home.

 

It's hard to be watchful and critical of your citizenry, as journalist, when they're your next door neighbors and they cut your hair, sell you your cars, and prepare your 'eatin' out' meals, and can shun you in retribution.

 

Small-towwn journalists have a particularly tough 'row to hoe', and sometimes their best stories are 'scooped' by statewide or larger scope publications (e.g. N.Y. Times, Washington Post, etc.) because locals 'cannot' publish taboo local subjects because of their 'incestuousness' with the local government, advertisers, etc.

 

(this does not reflect on your particular paper about which I know nothing.)

 

Regards John (Crosley)

I no longer work at this paper John, yes it was a small town one, but the only one, so was politically powerful locally, It was one tiny part of Media Mogul Rupert Murdochs empire.

 

 

Then I guess there's little doubt about its editorial stance. I respect your choice to stay silent about my comments, and encourage you to continue to do so; I have no editorial aspirations, so I can speak freely.

 

John