The Stringer

'', the photograph at the center of the documentary film's investigation The infamous photograph of Phuc, nine years old at the time, was taken on June 8, 1972, following a Republic of Vietnam Air Force napalm attack on the village of Trảng Bàng. Considered one of the most famous photographs of all time, it was and has remained attributed to Ut. Nguyen's film investigates whether a stringer actually took the photograph, claiming that it was intentionally misattributed to Ut. Photographer and VII Photo Agency co-founder Gary Knight led the two-year investigation which culminated in The Stringer; he had heard rumors about the photograph's incorrect credit a decade prior "at a reunion of Vietnam veteran journalists." Specifically, Knight heard it from Carl Robinson, a photo editor in the AP's Saigon bureau in 1972. The photograph was then circulated worldwide and went on to win a Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News Photography for Ut. Knight discovered possible evidence that the "Napalm Girl" photograph was actually taken by Nghe, who then sold it and other photographs to AP for $20. (At the time, Nghe was a driver for NBC and also a freelancer. Phuc has no memory of who took it but credits Ut. Knight then went to the AP office in London to discuss the film and its findings. Knight wanted to see the press' archives, but AP wanted to see the film's research first. Knight then asked for an agreement where AP could not report on the film until it premiered, which it refused. == Associated Press response ==

Prior to the film's premiere at Sundance, AP released an initial, 23-page report dated January 15, 2025 rebutting Nguyen's claims; at the time, officials there had not seen it. However, the AP wrote that it would continue to probe questions around the photograph's credit and "take appropriate remedial actions" in the event of more conclusive evidence. Phuc's uncle also defended Ut's credit. It showed that the photo was taken with a Pentax SLR—the type that Nghe carried—and not a Leica rangefinder—the type that Ut carried. That second report concluded "it is possible Nick Ut took the photo." ==Critical reception==

On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has a 92% "Fresh" rating, based on 24 reviews. David Friend, writing for Vanity Fair, wrote that "the power of the film does not reside in the filmmakers' investigative ingenuity. The movie rises and falls on the testimony of Nghe—and the memories movingly recounted by his family members, including his daughters and his brother-in-law, Tran Van Than. These accounts are riveting." However, Friend also acknowledged some of the film's "missing pieces" such as a lack of testimony from Ut and Phuc. He also found it "unconvincing" that the AP intentionally covered up the photograph's wrongful credit while recognizing the strength of the AP's rebuttal. Ultimately, Friend concluded: "See the film and judge for yourself." RogerEbert.com concluded that the film "builds to a scene of forensic investigation that is just phenomenal as a team of French experts takes photos and footage from that day to prove near-conclusively who took the shot... In an era when the very institution of journalism is in decline, it's almost comforting to see people like Knight fighting for its validity." Flickering Myth gave the film four out of five stars, writing that "As much as the film is about questioning the Associated Press, who certainly seem guilty and powerful enough to cut any whistleblower down to size, there is something more insidious at play of trusted, mostly white journalists not only potentially toying with history but the lives of Vietnamese war correspondents." Moveable Fest similarly argued that the film's most "powerful conclusion" was demonstrating how Vietnamese media lacked acknowledgment for their contributions to the reportage of the Vietnam War. Yunghi Kim, a photojournalist and Pulitzer Prize finalist, called the film an "attempted slander of a beloved trailblazing Asian photographer by a group of white producers." Nguyen countered by stating that the film had a team of mostly people of color and women. == References ==