Something that really pisses me off is when news photographers mistake the purpose of what they are doing for art. It is not. Their purpose is to shoot images that give the viewer information, not to be clever. If they can do both at once, that's great, but otherwise, no.

For example: [link]

I got absolutely nothing out of that picture that was not already in the caption. In fact, if the picture did not include the caption, I wonder how many people would be able to identify the balloon by only seeing a sliver of the front side from a high angle. That picture does not give information. To a news site and to a reader, it is worthless.

Compare with this: [link]

Better! Much better! Is it prettier or more artsy than the last one? Not a chance. But for the purpose of portraying information, it is leagues more useful. It shows that many people were there to see the parade, that others had to guide the balloon, how big the balloon was, the shape, how they had to divert traffic for the parade, etc.

How do you think of the purpose of news photography?