A Pulitzer-Winning War Photographer Allegedly Tried to Stop Screening of Sundance Doc About Him

by

As a devoted admirer, I’d like to share that back in 1972, Nick Ut – the renowned retired Associated Press photographer best known for his iconic “Napalm Girl” image – took a stand against the Sundance film screening. This movie allegedly claims that someone other than him was the true photographer, but unbeknownst Vietnamese stringer is the real subject, as reported by THR on Sunday.

The legal team of the Pulitzer Prize winner has issued a ‘cease-and-desist’ notice to the organizers of the festival and creators of the film “The Stringer”. Despite this, the movie premiered worldwide on Saturday as planned.

)

2. The festival spokesperson didn’t respond quickly when asked for a statement. An inquiry for comment sent to AP wasn’t responded to straight away. We couldn’t track down Ut at first. (Alternatively, we couldn’t find Ut initially.)

The latest development regarding the documentary has made Sundance a significant test of the reliability of contemporary media, as the dispute has grown rapidly intense.

For decades, Ut has been recognized as the photographer responsible for capturing an iconic image seared into many minds – a nine-year-old girl named Kim Phuc fleeing from a napalm attack in the town of Trang Bang, her body severely burned by the chemical weapon. This 1972 photograph, famously titled “The Terror of War,” served to reveal the brutal realities of the Vietnam War to people across the globe and catapulted Ut into celebrity status. Over the past five decades, he has continued to share the story behind this powerful photo.

The authenticity of the image is not in question. However, Carl Robinson, a former AP photo editor based in Saigon who left the organization in 1978, claims that the picture wasn’t taken by an AP staffer as originally credited. Instead, he alleges it was a freelancer who submitted the photo and was compensated $20 for it. Later, when the image was to be distributed via wire, Horst Faas, the late renowned AP photojournalist in Saigon, instructed Robinson to alter the credit from the freelancer to Ut, an AP staffer (Robinson asserts he chose to share this information after Faas’s death in 2012).

Based on information provided by a whistleblower, documentarian Bao Nguyen (known for “The Greatest Night In Pop”) and Gary Knight, a renowned photojournalist who leads the France-based press-freedom group VII Foundation, embarked on a mission to determine if another person might have taken the photograph, which eventually resulted in the creation of the documentary.

The seemingly trivial issue of author attribution evolves into an in-depth examination of numerous contemporary themes: the solidarity among a group of older white men, the misuse of freelance labor, the failure to perceive individuals of color as unique entities, and ultimately, who has the power to document world history.

In the interview with THR, Knight expressed that the narrative is centered around the persistent power disparity in journalism. This imbalance, he noted, was particularly prominent during the Vietnam War, favoring white heterosexual males, and remains a concern even today.

He stated, “It’s crucial to recognize that the most at-risk journalists globally are often local freelancers. To effectively keep tabs on political, religious, and civic leaders, it’s essential that we subject ourselves to examination too and question our own actions.

Working alongside journalists Terri Lichstein and Fiona Turner, Knight sought to investigate certain questions. The team enlisted INDEX, a media forensics company based in France, who determined that Ut was too distant from Phuc to have taken the iconic photograph. Additionally, they interviewed approximately 55 eyewitnesses and Saigon journalists who were nearby at Trang Bang on that fateful day. Forty-six of these individuals ended up being featured in the final analysis, sharing their accounts of what they observed during the traumatic instant captured in the photograph.

After much search, the movie creators found a photographer named Nguyen Nghe, a young Vietnamese who had moved to California post-war, who asserts that he was the one who captured the iconic photo. His daughter confirms this, stating it was evident in their home from the beginning, and his ongoing distress about the perceived oversight remains palpable. The film stirs a lingering sense of unfairness, heightened by the nonchalant dismissal of the claim by Peter Arnett and other esteemed journalists from the establishment.

In the gaming world I’ve found myself immersed in lately, there’s a character whose words echo strongly in an era of false narratives – “When facts are overlooked, it’s then that our community starts to decay,” he remarks.

It’s unclear what exactly drove Faas to make the change, but Knight proposes that possible reasons could be his dedication towards the organization’s permanent team and his loyalty to Ut, whose brother was a photojournalist who lost his life on assignment.

For some time now, Nghe has found himself at Sundance, relishing in a brief yet significant acknowledgment for an extraordinary deed that he claims remained unacknowledged by the world.

Bao Nguyen, who shares Vietnamese-American heritage with Ut and Nghe, explained to THR on Sunday that the reason for making the film was to share Nghe’s tale. Witnessing Nghe’s emotion at Sundance as he finally gets to share his story globally is what prompted me to bring this movie into existence.

Or is it Nghe’s story? The AP continues to maintain that Ut is the author.

The group announced that they finished a six-month probe triggered by the movie’s making, and found in their latest findings no significant changes occurred.

According to our recent findings, Nick Ut is likely the one who took this photograph. Unless there’s fresh, compelling proof suggesting otherwise, AP stands firm in believing that this photo was indeed captured by Ut.

On Sunday, the organization appeared to modify its position following a representative’s viewing of the movie at Sundance on Saturday. Rather than highlighting the author’s role, they shifted their focus towards the restrictions imposed by the filmmakers regarding access to the materials. The AP mentioned that they had been prevented from examining the content prior to the screening due to non-cooperation from the filmmakers, hence their decision to send someone to watch it at Sundance.

For approximately half a year, we’ve been meticulously reviewing details surrounding ‘The Terror of War’ photograph. From the outset, we requested access to the filmmakers’ resources so we could conduct a thorough examination. However, they only agreed to share this information if we signed a confidentiality agreement or agreed to a restriction on publication, which has limited our investigation and prevented us from rectifying any inaccuracies.

Knight, however, points out that the organization demanded to view all the data without any conditions stipulated through a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) or embargo. Given this, he felt it was not ethical for him to comply because it would essentially grant another media outlet unlimited access to his unpublished work.

If the New York Times was being scrutinized by the AP, and the AP requested access to all of the New York Times’ reports, the Times would have declined, as they should have. As the film has been released and any confidentiality agreements or embargoes are no longer applicable, Knight explained, the AP now has permission to examine whatever information they desire. In response, the AP stated that they are prepared to assess any and all evidence and fresh information concerning this photograph.

A representative from Associated Press did not promptly respond to inquiries about whether they might reopen their six-month long investigation that was recently concluded. As per Knight, unlike UT, AP has not pursued any legal proceedings against the movie creators, according to his knowledge.

According to Knight, Ut initially appeared as a victim, yet over the years, the young photojournalist seems to have been profiting from someone else’s success without giving due credit. He has constructed a distinguished career on this questionable basis. Moreover, Knight expresses ongoing concern about the way The Associated Press handled the situation.

It’s quite puzzling to me why they wouldn’t welcome examination. When journalists try to suppress a documentary examining journalistic ethics, I find it hard to comprehend, especially coming from a non-profit organization. (In its latest statement, the AP explained that “We can’t make it any clearer that The Associated Press is solely concerned with the facts and an accurate portrayal of this historic photo’s truth.”))

Organizations offering prizes might likewise choose to probe further following the revelation; Utt’s work has been recognized with an Overseas Press Club Award, the World Press Photo of the Year, and a National Medal of Arts. Nghe remarks in the movie, “I put in a lot of effort for it, but he ended up taking it all.

Regardless of how the story unfolds in The Stringer, it shines a spotlight on an evolving news industry that’s becoming increasingly dependent on freelancers and less-experienced reporters. A groundbreaking Pew Research study from 2022 revealed that over one-third of working journalists in America are now freelancers, with the actual percentage possibly being significantly higher due to the 2,600 full-time news jobs lost in 2023 and the continued cuts in 2024. In this context, Nghe’s struggle depicted in Nguyen’s film seems tragically prescient, as it highlights the precarious position of freelancers who are often relied upon yet overlooked when needed.

The movie further explores personal conflicts, dealing with awkward truths or disclosing inconvenient truths. According to The Hollywood Reporter‘s review at Sundance, Ut’s ability to claim credit for work that wasn’t his own reaches “deep literary realms…the territory of Conrad or Dostoyevsky.”

(Note: I tried to maintain the original meaning and style while making it easier to read.)

The movie might stir up controversy, prompting a response as people start questioning the creator’s identity. Furthermore, it may shed an awkward spotlight on the influence yielded by major news outlets. As Knight put it, “Journalism is not the domain of big corporations; rather, it’s a public service that belongs to everyone.

As a game enthusiast, I’ve got to say, the final chapter of this epic tale is still up in the air. In today’s cautious business environment where corporations are getting skittish, my favorite game, The Stringer, hasn’t found a distributor yet.

Read More

2025-01-27 12:30