The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
FDNY Firefighter Blows Whistle On Photoshopped WTC Ad
REUVEN FENTON and JENNIFER FERMINO
The New York Post
An ad for a controversial law firm specializing in 9/11 lawsuits shows a somber, soot-smeared FDNY firefighter holding an image of the charred remains of the World Trade Center under the headline "I was there."
The problem is, he wasn't.
Related
- SideCharlie.com: NYC Firm Throws Firefighter, Daily Show Unde the Bus
- STATter911: UPDATED: FDNY Firefighter/Model Blows Whistle on WTC Ad
Firefighter Robert Keiley - who joined New York's Bravest only in 2004 - was working as a model when he posed for what he thought would be used for a run-of-the-mill fire-prevention ad.
He appeared in generic firefighter gear and gripped a helmet for the shot - not the photo of the destroyed Twin Towers that was "put" into his hands with Photoshop software for the Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern ad.
"It's an insult to the Fire Department. It's an insult to all the families who lost people that day," said Keiley, 34, an ex-cop who now works out of an engine company in Flatbush, Brooklyn.
"It makes me look like I'm cashing in on 9/11, saying I was there even though I was never there, and that I'm sick and possibly suing, trying to get a chunk of money."
WTC-disaster law firm Worby Groner raised eyebrows in May when news surfaced that its lawyers were ready to take home a third or more of a settlement negotiated on behalf of sickened Ground Zero workers.
An angry federal judge said the arrangement gave too much money to the legal team and too little to sick workers - and the firm reduced its fees.
Keiley said that in one of his most painful moments since the ad surfaced, he had to call his best friend, whose brother died in 9/11, to tell him he had nothing to do with it.
"I had friends who died on 9/11," Keiley said. "How can I look their families in the eye if they see this picture, thinking I'm trying to make money on their [loved ones'] deaths? They'd probably think I'm a scumbag."
The Photoshopped image debuted Wednesday on a flier at the World Police Fire Games Event Gala, a fund-raiser for the annual sporting event.
At the bottom, in tiny letters, the ad stated, "This is an actor portrayal of a potential Zadroga claimant," referring to sick 9/11 workers who could receive aid under the federal James Zadroga Act.
Keiley, who moonlights as an actor and model, posed for the photo a year ago and netted $350.
He said he's now considering a lawsuit.
"It creates the image that he's claiming to have been at a tragic event when he was not," said his lawyer, Keith Sullivan.
"More offensive is [the claim] that he's trying to collect money from this fund, which he absolutely has no intention of doing."
Worby Groner directed all calls to the ad agency, Barker/DZP.
A rep insisted the agency was well within its rights to use the image because Keiley signed a release.
Statement from Barker/DZP Regarding Ad
"He really signed his rights away," said Kim Tracey, an account director at the agency. "[The release] allows for use in ads, promotional usage, really anything you want."
But John Feal, a tireless advocate for Ground Zero rescue workers, said that even a decade after 9/11, the images of that day are provocative.
"Maybe the ad agency should change the way they practice their business," he said.
Additional reporting by Jamie Schram and Cathy Burke
Copyright 2011 N.Y.P. Holdings, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
March 28, 2011
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
This individual may not be happy about it but... a contract is a contract.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
a) Model - A pretty person pretending to be something he/she is not.
b) Advertising - raising bullshit to an art form.
c) Small print - Where truth lies (pun intended).
d) Lawyer - Like a proctologist, you don't go to either just for the hell of it but only because you have to, and with either one, you still end up taking it in the a**.
-
Permalink Reply by Kathy Williams on
-
Jack/dt, right on brother. Especially re. the lawyers. Here in Ontario Canada when I had the unfortunate experience to use lawyers, they took almost $100,000 from me and I got $5,000. I agree that it is wrong to mis-use advertising the way the NY lawyers are doing. Even today, my prayers and thoughts are with those lost on 9/11, and with those associated with those lost (i.e. relatives etc.), and also the surviving brotherhood members (fire, police). Kathy
-
Permalink Reply by Side Charlie on
-
From SideCharlie.com
This is the actual flyer that was found in the gift bags at the World Police Fire Game Gala Event last week. SideCharlie.com was able to obtain a copy of the flyer today and this is a photo of it ...
-
Permalink Reply by Station10Capt106 on
-
I don't really see what the fuss is all about. It is an ADVERTISEMENT and for an ATTORNEY to boot. The guy was hired as an actor and as such also agreed to release the use of his image.
Does it matter that he wasn't at 9/11? The intent is to convey the emotional trauma that those at ground zero experienced . . . to me that is all he is, a symbol.
How many of us after that day rode on the coattails of the 343 as our own communities honored and celebrated us during town parades and events? Does it matter that we weren't personally there?
I know that some find this ad as wrong and an insult and don't agree with me, that's ok. I just feel that there is more important issues to focus on.
-
Permalink Reply by Jay E. Travis on
-
"Pretty" people with problems.
-
-
KGoD,
Mock if you will, but just this morning, I found the outline of a firefighter on my toast. (at first I thought it might have been jesus but the outline of the helmet was a dead giveaway.)
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
"It makes me look like I'm cashing in on 9/11, saying I was there even though I was never there, and that I'm sick and possibly suing, trying to get a chunk of money."
WTC-disaster law firm Worby Groner raised eyebrows in May when news surfaced that its lawyers were ready to take home a third or more of a settlement negotiated on behalf of sickened Ground Zero workers.
First things first here, are we as firefighters not supposed to be honest individuals? So why should things be different about this?
Yeah sure he may have signed something that the image could be used "however", but the fact remains he is being honest that he was not a FF at the WTC on 9/11, nor even working down there as one. He is honest about the fact he wasn't hired on the FDNY until 2004.
So yeah, there may be small print that this is an actor portrayal.....yeah an actor who also happens to be a FF for the FDNY, depicted in a claim stating he was at the WTC. So I can understand where he is upset about such a claim being made, depicting an ACTUAL member of the FDNY, claiming he was somewhere when he wasn't.
Small print....yep like we all read the small print. Any car ad, medication ad, and so on, yep sure "buried in the small print" so that just makes everything hunky dory? I disagree. The small print here is like the newspaper making an error on the front page, but the correction is buried in the middle a couple days later. By the time it is read, the opinion and conclusion is already made.
This guy is being up front about the fact he was not there, as the ad claims. Sorry folks, I'm not going to agree with the contract is a contract part nor about other FF's outside of the FDNY being recognized despite not being at the WTC either. However, quite a difference when you happen to work for the very dept that lost 343 FF's and other workers becoming ill, and you are depicted as telling a lie.
I commend his honesty here and I do believe the ad has been pulled.
-
Permalink Reply by Pararescue on
-
Then you really don't have any clue on what "Brotherhood" is really about.
-
-
What's wrong is that he is now a Brother FF. And the FDNY is thinking he is claiming he was there. Since the Brothers of the FDNY will make you leave the job for doing something like this, that's whats wrong. "It's all about the Brothers".
-
-
""I had friends who died on 9/11," Keiley said. "How can I look their families in the eye if they see this picture, thinking I'm trying to make money on their [loved ones'] deaths? They'd probably think I'm a scumbag.""
So NONE of his friends knew he was a model?
None of his friends, INCLUDING his BEST friend, didn't know he was NOT a fireman at the time of 9/11 or that he wasn't there? None of his coworkers don't know he wasn't on the job in 2001?
Really?
He's embarrassed about the ad. Understandably so. The article doesn't say but, did he contact the law firm, explain to them the situation and ask them to remove his picture? Or is it simply that the ad came out, someone brought it to his attention and he was embarrassed and just went public with it?
He hits all the right notes (with, I'd bet, the advice of a good lawyer, irony there) because it sounds reasonable, you know, because it makes him look like a scumbag. Emotion once again trumps truth and common sense.
Damn ad agencies, damn lawyers, someone protect me from myself.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
