Kodak has deleted pictures of Xianjiang Uyghurs from their Instagram after pressure from Chinese media & commentors

[u/taistolaisuus]

[u/PartlyDave]

Ironic statement from Kodak considering how entrenched film and photography (and art in general) is in politics. Photography brings dark things to light and shows the world a mirror. How many “iconic” photos have a political subtext? Are they going to come out and distance themselves from every politically associated photo in their feed? I get why they are doing it, but at least acknowledge the actual reason. Removing the post IS a political statement on its own. Who do they think they’re fooling?

[u/rzrike → u/PartlyDave]

Exactly. Film has been used for political expression for 100+ years! What are they talking about saying that they aren’t a “platform for political commentary”?

[u/amut03 → u/rzrike]

Their entire business is basically funded by politics. Some of the most publicised, recognizable, and controversial photos that defined what good photojournalism is have been taken on kodak.

[u/zushini → u/rzrike]

Exactly. Since when is any photograph of any human being a political statement?

I can see no other context where this would apply other then under the boot of a tyrannical government.

[u/octopaws → u/PartlyDave]

In the late late 60s/70s (?) Kodak got into a lot of controversy due to their film stock not being able to render darker skin tones, whilst only appealing photography to white America. Kodak has always been in and out of political scrutiny

[u/viriconium_days → u/octopaws]

This was probably related to the fact that they didn't hire black people. It was treated as something that didn't need to be said, just an obvious fact. Black people were really allowed to live in the company town, so they didn't receive many black applicants either.

[u/rundfunk90 → u/viriconium_days]

And they only fixed it when wood companies started complaining about their dark wood not being rendered accurately on film.