Reading Response Week 6: Ralli

The controversy present in Ralli's article hinge on definition because the main issue is how to define what victims of hurricane Katrina were doing when they took food that did not belong to them. The African American being called a looter implies that he was doing something illegal while the white couple were merely carrying food they found out of necessity for survival. The relevant terms present are looter and carrier. The controversy is found by the fact that both parties were most likely getting food out of necessity but one party was described as criminal and the other as innocent of any wrong doing, but merely foraging for survival. The AP defined looting as anyone being seen entering a store and coming out with some sort of good, not necessarily limited to food or beverage. If the subject of the photograph was not seen entering the store, the AP described them as carrying food. Getty Images had a similar definition to AP's, and the photographer stated that he had not seen the couple enter the store, they were merely in front of a store where items were floating out, so he would not describe what they were doing as looting. Therefore the AP photographer described the subject of the photo as looting based on AP's definition of what the subject was doing and the Getty Images photographer described the subject of the photo as carrying food and drink based on the Getty Images definition of what they were doing. To be honest I prefer the photographer from Getty Images definition to both the AP definition and the Getty Images definition. If people were carrying electronics or things not necessary for survival, then they should definitely be labeled as looters. However, in a desperate situation like hurricane Katrina, anyone gathering food and beverage when there was a severe lack of both, should not be described as a criminal because it was in the interest of their own survival.