Photographer's if you ever have to ask yourself "Am I the right person to do this story" the answer is always NO. Particularly when you are in the Africa & developing world, which has been historically seen via white lens. Esp where you need an army of fixers, translators, etc. https://twitter.com/panospictures/status/1278611030982176768

Also a lot of white folks seem to think "diversity" in photography is giving away assignments of "couple of days" that "you don't depend on" monetarily. Diversity is white people giving up their seats that they have due to their white privilege.

The playing field has never been level, you can be in Africa for several years to tell stories which are not essentially yours, which have no bearing on your lives due to your race privilege. African photographers should not be second choice. They MUST be the ONLY choice.

Appreciate Lorek's honesty in not passing on a 3 week @natgeo assignment to a local photographer because "that would be too much to ask for" as she's in Africa to "build up your portfolio & stay in touch with editors".

Also appreciate Lorek's criticism of editors parachuting in photographers for a couple of days and not hiring locals because they consider them not "delivering in quality" & "not neutral enough" - because white superiority & white objectivity is still apparently a thing.

Lorek also mentions about not seeing pictures from Uganda of the massive refugee influx. The reason is obviously the lack of access / proximity to editors in the US for someone from Africa but also unless something has been seen via white eyes it is not considered valid.

Lorek also mentions about not pitching stories from the US even though they are important but it also has to be "visually interesting" And obviously photography has historically been about "the other" where the African body is still looked at as a trophy. Talk about colonial gaze