'Solicitation' for reporters to take photos without saving the victims

When the New York Post published pictures that recorded a man about to be hit by a subway train, many readers expressed an outcry over the person who made the photo, why he did not pull The victim left the railroad track and took the camera to record that fateful moment.

Explaining his actions, freelance photojournalist R. Umar Abbasi told the Post that he simply followed his instincts and in fact did not have enough time to rescue the man: 'I don't know what to do but flash the flash on the camera, hoping the driver can see and stop. I didn't even realize that I was taking pictures. I just looked at the train coming. It all happened so fast, since I heard a shout until the train crashed into this man who was only blinking for about 22 seconds. '

While the majority of readers disagree with this answer, neurobiologists and psychologists seem to sympathize with Abbasi. They said that Abbasi's action could be explained by science, regarding the so-called 'good Samaritan' .

Talking about the emotionlessness of the pain of others, it is impossible not to remember the story of the 'good Samaritan' . This phrase comes from the Gospel of Luke, in which the word 'Samaritan' becomes a symbol of kindness in general. Since the 17th century, it has appeared in English vocabulary, meaning that people are kind, sympathetic to others' pain and are not afraid to help others. In legal terminology, 'Good Samaritan' means ' someone who is willing to help another person who is injured or at risk of being injured just because of goodwill and without calculating whether to pay off or not. any other reward ".

The picture depicts the story 'Samaritan people
post 'in the Gospel of Luke. (Photo: Public domain)

In fact, in similar situations in the case of Abbasi, the possibility that the 'good Samaritan' could save someone is quite rare, Darcia Narvaez, Professor of Psychology at Notre University. Dame, Indiana state (USA) said. 'A good' Samaritan action 'can fail at any time. Many people simply don't really pay attention to what's going on around them. '

Two years ago, a similar accident occurred in the metro area in Washington, DC when a man fell on a railroad track while convulsing. Immediately, a retired marines soldier used a command to control the ship's navigation and jump to help the man out of danger.

'That's the difference when you have experience in practice,' Narvaez said. 'He reacted instinctively - actions formed in the military environment. In the same way, a photographer's natural reaction would be to flash the flash on his camera. '

In this view, in a book published in 1970 called 'The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help?' , two psychologists Bibb Latane and John Darley clarified the concept of "Outsider Effect " (Bystander Effect). Based on a series of experiments, they found that the greater the number of outsiders who witnessed an emergency, the less likely that one of those people would help the victim by two main reasons:

- First, because we are always inclined to receive signals and observe the actions of those around us as a source of suggestions to determine our actions, especially in case we don't know anything. is happening, so if you don't see other people react, we'll follow suit to the majority.

- Secondly, the more people witnessing the incident, the more their personal responsibility is reduced. If you are the only one who witnesses the incident, the clear responsibility lies entirely in you. But if there's a crowd of 10 people, you may feel your responsibility drops to just 10%.

So, if you are a victim in a car accident, find a specific person, look into their eyes and say: 'I need your help , ' Narvaez said.

In this case, not only experts but also photographers expressed sympathy for Abbasi's actions.