wire services: the AP, Agence France Presse, european pressphoto agency and Getty Images. Did AFP, EPA and Getty ask for assurances on the accompanying text? Were they given any assurances? Did those agencies make any other stipulations about the use of their images? What is their view now? # 4. According to the Noorderlicht press release, AP rejected two compromise options: either a statement accompanying Franklin's essay making clear it was a "personal opinion" and did not reflect the views of the photographers' agencies, or some text from AP itself to counter Franklin's essay. If this is the case, why did AP reject both these options and instead allegedly threaten legal action against the organisers? # AP spokesperson Paul Colford told PDN his organization did not want their photos "to bolster a highly charged political point of view." Given this, why did AP agree -- regardless of the nature of any accompanying text -- to have its photographs included in the exhibition in the first place? # The Israel-Palestinian conflict is nothing if not highly charged in all respects, and as an organization AP knows this better than anyone. Their photographers are regularly abused -- just read some of the scandalous comments posted on the PDN web site in the wake of this issue that speak of these professionals as "Muslim cowards" and "Arab propagandists." Or consider the conservative bloggers who revel in calling any images from the Middle East they don't like " fauxtography ." Or recall the vitriol