[Mike McCarty]

This subject has been discussed before on this forum, but I've had some questions in light of what I saw on TV during hurricane Katrina.

There are people like myself who, after asking permission, would take a picture of a stranger in the park. After taking this picture they may use it as a reference for a painting, and proceed to use all there skills to put this person in the best and most flattering light. However, other than the verbal permission, there is no contractual agreement which gives the artist the right to use the strangers image. The consensus on the forum has always been to get a models release signed before proceeding to use the image liberally.

Why is it that TV reporters can act in such a cavalier manner in capturing real time images of people experiencing the most humiliating moments of their lives? There is no doubt that the images are used for profit. Even with the subject shouting their objection to the reporter they would proceed.

A person like myself who wants to create a thing of beauty with verbal permission is advised that they should get a signed legal release, and a TV reporter can proceed not only without a verbal or written permission, but, in the face of a shouting objection.

Is there some perverse right that the media has that I do not?