-Those protesting the Vietnam war: I believe this group would find it useful that the picture was printed since it shows the negativity of war and outrages the public to the point where there would be a lot more anti-war movements.
-US government in support of the Vietnam war: would find this photograph to be very harmful to their cause. It shows the negativity of the war, and since the U.S. would be supporting Long it even makes the U.S. look bad and responsible for the action taken by Long.
- Eddie Adams in 1969: obviously the picture had good short term outcomes for Adams in that he got the Pulitzer prise for it in 69, but it has a negative long term consequence in that he felt guilty for making Long look like a monster to millions of people when he was actually a beloved hero to the Vietnamese public.
-Nyugen Ngoc Loan: This is a bad photograph for him but a good one for his cause. It is bad for him because it portrays him as a monster to the public that does not know the background of the situation, and also resulted in him getting removed from the Australian hospital where he was being treated for his war injuries. It is a good photograph for his cause since it shows that there is zero tolerance for the Viet Cong, especially those that harm the public.
-Nguyen Van Lam's widow: This photograph in the long run helped her out in that the government ended up giving the widow and the children a place to stay, it also resulted in her getting a lot of sympathy by the public.
-A publisher who must decide if this picture should appear in a fifth grade history book: would end up deciding to not print the picture since it portrays violence. it could also been seen as a way of promoting violence. Children of the age would not understand the background of the story or the reasoning behind the shooting.