1.What are the different sorts of images of death mentioned in this case, and what differentiates each type? 2.Under what conditions, if any, is it acceptable to photograph the dead for news purposes?

3.What responsibility does journalists and news organizations have to the deceased? How does one respect an individual who no longer is alive?

4.If journalism is meant to inform on important public issues, could a shocking photograph be too moving? When does powerful photojournalism shade into unethical manipulation?

5.What ethical obligations do photojournalists owe their readers? Do these considerations change when violence or other human agents are involved?

1. the townshend acts of 1767 “threaten the country with poverty and ruin.”

at a town meeting held at faneuil hall in boston on october 28, 1767, boston freeholders and residents discussed the implications of the brutal townshend acts levied against the colonists. the townshend acts were a set of four acts passed by the british parliament in the summer of 1767 in order to generate revenue for the crown (through duties on goods such as lead, glass, paper, and tea) as well as exert british control over the increasingly rebellious colonists.

during the oct. 28 meeting, the bostonians found:

the excessive use of foreign superfluities is the chief cause of the present distressed state of this town, as it is thereby drained of its money: which misfortune is likely to be increased by means of the late additional burthens and impositions on the trade of the province, which threaten the country with poverty and ruin.

as a result, the citizens unanimously voted to boycott all british-made goods.

the dissolution of the soviet union[a] occurred on december 26, 1991, officially granting self-governing independence to the republics of the soviet union. it was a result of the declaration number 142-н of the supreme soviet of the soviet union.[1] the declaration acknowledged the independence of the former soviet republics and created the commonwealth of independent states (cis), although five of the signatories ratified it much later or did not do so at all. on the previous day, december 25, soviet president mikhail gorbachev, the eighth and final leader of the soviet union, resigned, declared his office extinct, and handed over its powers – including control of the soviet nuclear missile launching codes – to russian president boris yeltsin. that evening at 7: 32 p.m., the soviet flag was lowered from the kremlin for the last time and replaced with the pre-revolutionary russian flag.[2]

previously, from august to december, all the individual republics, including russia itself, had either seceded from the union or at the very least denounced the treaty on the creation of the ussr. the week before formal dissolution, 11 republics signed the alma-ata protocol formally establishing the cis and declaring that the ussr had ceased to exist.[3][4] both the revolutions of 1989 and the dissolution of the ussr also marked the end of the cold war.

several of the former soviet republics have retained close links with the russian federation and formed multilateral organizations such as the commonwealth of independent states, eurasian economic community, the union state, the eurasian customs union, and the eurasian economic union to enhance economic and security cooperation. on the other hand, the baltic states have joined nato and th

cruel and illegal punishments

that would be the correct answer

latin america

explanation: