Ethical Photojournalism
The digital age has given photographers and editors the ability to manipulate photographs creating an ethical dilemma, not only in the media, but also the very nature of photography.
Since photojournalism existed there has been debate on what was shot and how far was too far when seeking newsworthy images. It is a debate that rages on today. The label "paparazzi" is given to photographers who hound people for a shot that they can sell, regardless of approval from the subjects. Capturing the newsworthy shot or a clear photograph not taken by media competitors has put pressure on photojournalists to get access to the subject no mater what the risk. That pressure is more refined in digital photography with manipulation now part of the ethical dilemma.
With the creation of digital images and the easy-to-use editing equipment, the realism of photographs has been called into question. The editing of digital image is easy and almost impossible to detect. Almost every photograph is manipulated in some way from basic cropping to fit the picture to the page to reshaping the subject, common in fashion magazines. In some extreme cases the photographs are almost completely changed with people and objects added or deleted from a photograph.
One infamous example occurred on March 31 2003 on the cover of the Los Angles Times. The US was in conflict with Iraq and questions were still being asked about the validity of the war. In the front page photograph a British soldier had one hand raised in a halt position with the other clutching a gun with the barrel raised. In front of the soldier was an Iraqi man holding a child, he was obviously distressed. This image was completely fabricated with the image of man and child cropped into the photograph. The original photograph of the soldier with his hand and gun up was to a group of sitting Iraqi prisoners. The deception was uncovered and within the week photographer, Brian Walski, was dismissed by the newspaper.
This is an extreme case where the image was manipulated enough to completely change the viewers grasp of what is going on in the photography. A National Geography cover of a rider and camel in front of two pyramids was also an edited image that came under the microscope. In this case the complete image could not fit on the page because the camel was too far away from the pyramids so the pyramids were moved behind the rider. A process that took thousands of years for the early Egyptians was completed with a few clicks of a button with modern editing equipment.
This deceptive form of photography has received a great deal of publicity, because photography's purpose is to show reality through picture. By editing photographs the photojournalist has created its own reality, particularly in the case of the Los Angles Times.
To avoid deception many media outlets have a disclaimer on the border of the photograph indicating when it has been edited. However, this disclaimer itself has created it own problems.
Firstly, a disclaimer can offer false security because if the photojournalist or editor is deceiving the public then he/she will not add a disclaimer.
Secondly, most pictures are edited in some form where it be as simple as cropping the photograph to fit the space, or to change colors to put more highlight in the photo. If a disclaimer is required in these circumstances, then almost all photographs would require a disclaimer rendering it a useless statement.
There is an issue of changing the colors in the photograph, influencing it meaning. For example, on July 27 1994 a photograph of the mug-shot of OJ Simpson appeared on the cover of both Newsweek and Time Magazine. The Time cover was darkened which gave the accused a more sinister look. OJ Simpson was on trial for murdering his ex-wife and her lover at the time of the printing of the two covers.
These examples may seem trivial, however photojournalism captures the first steps of history and the manipulation of photographs leads to a fabricated history.
Photographers seem to have a clear understanding of the importance of their work and have an unwritten rule of providing untampered photographs. However pressure for results from newsrooms and editors can influence a photographers work and ethical behavior. Plus there are many people along the chain of command in a newsroom and, in many cases editors have to trust that subordinates acted in faith and the photograph on the page, or film for that matter, is not fabricated.
Return to the Help Centre
Ethical Photojouralism
|
