SFMOMA have a new show called "Exposed: Voyeurism, Surveillance, and the Camera Since 1870" which pans on a historical tradition where photography was, and still is, an innately invasive medium. In the above picture, a photographer sneakily snap the moment of a murderer's execution. What was the photographer's purpose in this?
Somehow the human condition yearns for the image of significant events, perhaps to solidify the scene in public perception. Did Barack Obama's inauguration happen if the ordained photographer did not capture that key picture where the president has a look of holy transcendence? This heavy ability of photography can easily be abused; what you see if not always what you get.
For more on the show see: http://www.sfweekly.com/2010-12-15/culture/exposed-sfmoma-review-photography/