Park City, Utah – Saturday night in Park City saw the world premiere of “The Stringer,” which raises questions about the origins of one of the most famous photographs ever taken. The documentary, directed by Bao Nguyen, claims that a photo taken on June 8, 1972, of a naked 9-year-old girl called… Phan Thi Kim Phuc While fleeing a napalm attack on the village of Trang Bang in South Vietnam, she was not captured by Nick Ut, the Associated Press photographer credited.
The photo, officially titled “The Horror of War” but more commonly known as “Napalm Girl,” won a Pulitzer Prize and was the cornerstone of his career until his retirement from the Associated Press in 2017. Yuet was just 21 when the incident occurred in Truong Bang .
Instead, “The Stringer” claims the photo was actually taken by Nguyen Thanh Nghe, a driver for an NBC news crew who was present that day and whose photos made it to the AP as a freelance journalist, also known as Stringer.
The origin of the claim in the film comes from Carl Robinson, the AP photo editor in Saigon that day. In the film, Robinson claims that Horst Vass, the head of Saigon’s photo department, ordered him to “make it a Nick Out” and that Robinson incorrectly credited him with what would within a few hours become the picture known around the world.
The film team embarked on a two-year investigation of their own, eventually leading them to Nguyen Thanh Nghi, who says in the film that he took the photo. In a moment when he later met Ott but did not mention the origins of the shot, the film’s Vietnamese cameraman said: “I worked hard for it, but this guy had to have it all.”
On Saturday afternoon, before the film’s premiere, director Nguyen and executive producer Gary Knight, the veteran photojournalist who appears on screen in the film, sat down for an interview in Park City about the documentary and its startling claims.
“This story challenges my profession and proves the truth in my profession,” Knight said. “So we owe it to our profession to be very diligent and to do this right. And going backwards from the profession that we expected will be difficult. That’s true.”
“Bao is a very prominent Vietnamese American director, and he comes from the same community as Stringer and Nick,” Knight said. “So we’ve all invested heavily in making sure that we’re diligent and thoughtful and treat everyone with respect and we’ve tried to do it right. So we’re all stakeholders in the story.”
Prior to the film’s release, the AP conducted its own screening Investigate the origin of the image Over the course of six months, I interviewed seven people who were witnesses to the events that occurred on the road in Trang Bang that day and at the AP office in Saigon where the photo was developed and printed. None of these witnesses were interviewed on camera during the filming. The AP report concludes: “Absent new and convincing evidence to the contrary, the AP has no reason to believe that anyone other than Ott took the photo.”
The internal report also said the AP “will fully consider any questions about the image and, if credit is indeed incorrect, will take appropriate remedial action.”
Image from the documentary “The Stringer”.
(Sundance Institute)
Knight is also the co-founder and CEO of the VII Foundation, a nonprofit journalism advocacy and education organization. Nguyen’s previous work includes documentaries “The greatest night in pop music” On the recording of “We Are the World” and “Be Water,” a portrait of Bruce Lee, both of which premiered at Sundance.
“The lives that many refugees and immigrants leave behind when they come to a strange, foreign place, there’s an expectation that they have the same ability to tell their stories and tell their stories, but it’s not the same,” he said. Nguyen. “This film is in many ways an account of this assumption that, ‘Well, if Nghi had this truth for so long, why didn’t he say anything?’”
“But can you imagine moving to a new culture, to a new place, and just trying to take care of your family and going into a system that he doesn’t understand and thinks he doesn’t belong in?” Nguyen said. “Documentaries specifically have a responsibility to try to acknowledge all of these misrepresentations and systems that exist.”
According to an AP report, in a 2005 oral history from the Associated Press archives, Robinson made no mention of the photo’s misidentification and gave no indication of uncertainty as to whether Ott took the photo. There is also no reference to Robinson’s claims in his book about his time in Vietnam, although in the film he expresses regret at this omission.
“This story doesn’t stop with Carl,” Knight said. “We interviewed 55 people, 45 of them on camera, and we did forensic research, which was vetted. So we’re not relying on Carl’s story. And that was just the beginning of the journey. Whether or not the AP chooses to talk about Carl as a disgruntled employee, “That doesn’t make him a bad witness in and of itself. A lot of whistleblowers are in the same situation so we wouldn’t make a film based solely on one man’s accusations. This is not journalism.”
In a phone interview on Saturday, James Hornstein, an attorney representing Ute (who has not yet seen the film), said in reference to Robinson: “I think it is disgraceful that the VII Foundation has provided a platform for a man who clearly has a vendetta that has been simmering for over 50 years.
“I refused to participate in this outrageous and false attack on Nick Ut that Mr. Robinson has raised over the past years,” Kim Phuc, who has no recollection of the events of that day, said in a statement provided by Hornstein to the Times. …I will never be in a Gary Knight movie because I know it’s not true.
Among the most convincing arguments presented in the film is the visual timeline created using all available photographic and film evidence to place Ott outside the location where the “horror of war” image was intended to be created, with Nghi in the right place.
“I stand by research and forensics,” Knight said. “I think Ngi is the only person who was in the right place to take that photo.”
The AP report says it also created a visual timeline using available materials but the results “provide few clues about the source of the image.” As the photos show, “Along with Ott’s powerful body of work from that day, a scenario in which Ott, energetically running around the scene, had ample opportunity to capture the picture.”
While no one involved in the documentary disputes the solid truth of what is in the image itself, the assertion that the origins and authorship of the image are up for debate has a potentially life-changing dimension.
“It’s very upsetting for him on a personal and emotional level, as one can imagine,” Hornstein said of the effect on Ute. “This is probably the most important work he’s ever done in terms of the acclaim this picture has brought. And to accuse him of lying about this, which this film does, is devastating.”
For Nguyen, the film finally tells a story that no one has heard until now.
“For me personally, the movie is about finding the reporter,” Nguyen said. “It’s uplifting for Beng, this 53-year-old burden that he’s carried on his shoulders for most of his life. And as you can see in the film as well, the stories of so many Vietnamese journalists and Vietnamese American journalists have been neglected for decades.
“Nick’s narrative has been well-established through previous interviews, and with very little editorial. It’s just been presented as he’s always said it,” Nguyen said. “So it’s more about focusing on this other part of the story that has been in the shadows for a while.” Long.”
