Photography is a powerful tool in raising awareness about certain issues. Do you know this photo about a young Syrian child from Aleppo who was injured in an airstrike? Without moving images like these, some people would have no idea about the horrors of war or grasp an understanding of the pain some go through. Yet some consider photos like these to be exploitation, too.

I remember reading an interesting debate about photographing the homeless in the San Francisco Bay Area Street Photography Facebook group. One man posted that the group shouldn't allow photos of the homeless anymore because it exploits them. Some people who agreed chimed in: How many of these photographers got permission? How many actually bother to help the homeless people - do they only snap a photo and leave? How many people donate to homeless people as a result of seeing these sorts of photos?

Yet others jumped to defend themselves. A few claimed that they would delete the photo if they were asked to; others were angry at the idea of censoring reality. One person who used to be homeless said that she would be happy if someone photographed her back then to raise awareness.

What's the right answer for this situation? Admittedly, I don't have a final answer. I think consent is very important, but what if it's a situation where the ends justify the means and a few photos - even if taken without permission, if they were not for the purpose of exploitation - result in help for a homeless person? It's a tricky but intriguing situation.