????太陽(yáng)時(shí)報(bào)報(bào)業(yè)集團(tuán)（Sun-Times Newspaper Group）裁掉整個(gè)攝影師團(tuán)隊(duì)（這些攝影師合計(jì)擁有大約500年左右的專業(yè)經(jīng)驗(yàn)）的決定讓所有人都在納悶：究竟有什么能夠證明此舉的合理性。是為了破壞工會(huì),？是要從一個(gè)急劇衰落的行當(dāng)中擠壓利潤(rùn),？還是為了擺脫發(fā)霉的“傳統(tǒng)媒體”形象，勇敢地邁入輝煌的數(shù)字化未來(lái)而進(jìn)行的一種真正意義上（但看似沒(méi)有什么章法）的嘗試,？又或者,，它只是一種施虐狂癥狀？

????真正的原因可能涵蓋了以上所有這些因素,。這份報(bào)紙的高管們基本上保持著緘默,，但他們的公開聲明完全是以“奮進(jìn)”為基調(diào)的。以下是這份聲明的完整內(nèi)容：

????《芝加哥太陽(yáng)報(bào)》（Chicago Sun-Times）的業(yè)務(wù)正在迅速改變,，我們的受眾始終在尋求包含更多視頻內(nèi)容的新聞,。我們?cè)跐M足這種需求方面已取得了長(zhǎng)足進(jìn)步，而且正在全身心地致力于加強(qiáng)我們用視頻和其他多媒體元素進(jìn)行新聞報(bào)道的能力,?！短?yáng)報(bào)》將繼續(xù)與精于數(shù)字技術(shù)的讀者共同進(jìn)化。因此,，我們不得不在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上重組了包括攝影在內(nèi)的多媒體內(nèi)容的管理方式,。

????目前還不清楚，解雇整個(gè)攝影師團(tuán)隊(duì)究竟能從哪些方面幫助這家公司與“精于數(shù)字技術(shù)的讀者”共同“進(jìn)化”,。除上述內(nèi)容外,，這家公司并未透露其他信息。但羅伯特?菲德今晨發(fā)布的一條微博讓我們得以客觀地看待這個(gè)事件,。菲德是一位廣受尊敬的媒體記者,，在《太陽(yáng)報(bào)》效力了長(zhǎng)達(dá)28年之久，直至2008年下崗（更正：菲德實(shí)際上是自愿買斷了工齡）,。他在這條微博中寫道：“報(bào)社的全部攝影記者被解雇后,，《太陽(yáng)報(bào)》的記者們今天開始參加關(guān)于‘iPhone手機(jī)攝影基礎(chǔ)知識(shí)’的強(qiáng)制性培訓(xùn)?！?/p>

????一些科技專家和咨詢師不分青紅皂白地貶低任何被視為“舊媒體”的事物,，而且同樣不加選擇地支持任何被視為“新媒體”的事物,。在這些人的協(xié)助和教唆下，許多報(bào)紙刻意將自己唯利是圖的措施描繪成為對(duì)某種“奮進(jìn)”戰(zhàn)略的堅(jiān)守,。新奧爾良《皮卡尤恩時(shí)報(bào)》（Times-Picayune）就是一個(gè)最新例證（到目前為止,，這項(xiàng)戰(zhàn)略產(chǎn)生了怎樣的效果？不那么好）,。高管們自己或許在一定程度上真的相信這種戰(zhàn)略——合理化,，是一項(xiàng)商學(xué)院并未傳授（至少?zèng)]有明確傳授），但非常有用的技能,。報(bào)業(yè)是一個(gè)深得公眾信賴,，但也正在喪失經(jīng)濟(jì)基礎(chǔ)的行業(yè)。對(duì)于投身這個(gè)行業(yè),、以追求利潤(rùn)最大化為己任的高管們來(lái)說(shuō),，這項(xiàng)技能絕對(duì)必要。因此,，《太陽(yáng)報(bào)》的高管們能夠把一家視覺(jué)媒體解雇整個(gè)圖片團(tuán)隊(duì)的舉動(dòng)描繪成某種有助于他們“與精于數(shù)字技術(shù)的讀者共同進(jìn)化”的措施,。

????應(yīng)該指出的是，記者的攝影技術(shù)通常很糟糕,。比如,，攝影技術(shù)不過(guò)關(guān)的記者在事故現(xiàn)場(chǎng)一邊忙著收集信息，一邊忙著抓拍,，出來(lái)的照片往往不能打動(dòng)任何人,，無(wú)論這些人是不是精于數(shù)字技術(shù)。新聞學(xué)院（同樣,，它們也受到了某些科技專家和咨詢師宣揚(yáng)的愚蠢理論的影響）一直在推動(dòng)“多媒體新聞”理念,，也就是要求記者拍攝照片和視頻。大多數(shù)情況下,，它將導(dǎo)致一個(gè)人搞砸三份工作,，而不是一個(gè)人做好一份工作,。此外,，它往往會(huì)破壞一個(gè)觀念：所有這些都是專業(yè)性很強(qiáng)的工作；同時(shí)它還會(huì)加強(qiáng)了另外一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤的概念：任何人都能夠同樣出色地完成所有這些工作,。無(wú)論是對(duì)記者,，還是對(duì)讀者而言，這都是一種令人震驚的不尊重,。

????The decision by Sun-Times Newspaper Group to eliminate its entire photography staff, with its 500 or so collective years of professional experience, has everyone wondering what could possibly justify such a move. Is it union-busting? A way to squeeze profits out of a rapidly sinking business? A genuine, if seemingly clueless, attempt to shed a fusty "old media" image and forge ahead into the glorious digital future? Sadism?

????It could actually be a combination of any or all of those things. The newspaper's executives have been mostly mum, but their public statement was all about "forging ahead." Here's that statement in full:

????The Sun-Times business is changing rapidly and our audiences are consistently seeking more video content with their news. We have made great progress in meeting this demand and are focused on bolstering our reporting capabilities with video and other multimedia elements. The Chicago Sun-Times continues to evolve with our digitally savvy customers, and as a result, we have had to restructure the way we manage multimedia, including photography, across the network.

????It is unclear how, precisely, canning the entire photo staff helps the company "evolve" with its "digitally savvy customers." The company isn't otherwise saying anything. But a tweet this morning from Robert Feder, who was the Sun-Times' widely respected media reporter for 28 years until he was laid off in 2008 [update/correction: Feder actually took a voluntary buyout], puts things in perspective: "Sun-Times reporters," he wrote, "begin mandatory training today on 'iPhone photography basics' following elimination of the paper's entire photo staff."

????Aided and abetted by tech pundits and consultants who indiscriminately belittle anything perceived as "old media" and, equally indiscriminately, champion anything perceived as "new media," many newspapers have characterized their more mercenary moves as hewing to a "forging ahead" strategy. See the New Orleans Times-Picayune for another recent example of this (and how has that worked out so far? Not so well). The executives themselves might actually believe it on some level -- rationalization is a useful skill that isn't taught in business school, at least not explicitly. For profit-maximizing executives working in a business that is considered a public trust, but is also losing its economic foundations, the skill is absolutely necessary. Hence, in this case, they are able to characterize the elimination of an entire photo staff in a fundamentally visual medium as something that will help them "evolve with [their] digitally savvy customers."

????Reporters, it should be noted, are in general terrible at taking pictures. Photographs snapped on iPhones by photographically inept reporters who are also trying to gather information at an accident scene, for example, are not going to impress anyone, digitally savvy or not. Journalism schools (again, often working from the addled theories of certain tech pundits and consultants) have been pushing the idea of "multimedia journalism" -- that is, having reporters take photos and shoot video. Many of them offer training in this area. Most often, this results in nothing more than one person doing three jobs poorly rather than doing one job well. It also tends to sabotage the notion that all of these are professional endeavors and to strengthen the false notion that anybody could perform any of them equally well. This reveals a shocking level of disrespect for both journalists and readers.