Ethics Photojournalism

Photojournalism and digital imaging ethics

Photojournalism, present day finds itself standing at the proverbial crossroads. Will digital imaging technologies and public cynicism lead to its downfall or will journalists rise to the challenge by practicing a new more credible form of visual /photo journalism. Ethical blunders by such journalistic icons as National Geographic and TIME have all contributed to visual journalism losing credibility with the public. It was only a hundred years ago that people believed what saw in photographs was true. On the other hand present day, the increasing response to an unusual photograph is "They did that with PhotoShop." Where does this leave a medium whose mission is to deliver a realistic eyewitness account of the public and events all over the world? As a result digital imaging technology had led to an increased awareness of the ease of manipulation to photographs with programs like Adobe PhotoShop has brought to light in visual journalism the need for a re-examination of the preconceived logic that suggests that because a machine makes photographs, that photography is free of the bias resulting from human intervention, leading photojournalism towards higher, not lower ethical standards.

Genuine photos can change the hearts and minds of the people. Real photographs can change how we view war and how we view or society. Vietnam is a prime example. Two photos sum up that war: the Nick Ut's photo of the girl burned by napalm running naked down the street

and the Eddie Adams' photo of a man being executed on the streets of Saigon. These photos changed how we perceived that war. They are powerful and they get their power from the fact that they are real moments captured for all time on film. It is the photojournalist responsibility to let no one change the content of these photos or the content of any documentary photo. It is an obligation to history.

The public regards photography, especially news photography, as verifiable fact. And unfortunately, in a digital age, nothing could be farther from the truth. "People believe in news photographs. They have more inherent trust in what they see than what they read," Ken Kobre, head of photojournalism studies at San Francisco State University, "Digital manipulation throws all pictures into a questionable light. It's a gradual process of creating doubts in the viewer's mind."

Previously in the century, publishers had discovered the advantage of adding illustrations to the written word. Photography's incorporation into journalism during the late nineteenth century presented a number of advantages to those who produced the news.

The addition of pictures and photographs in the press increased circulation, expanding the appeal and the reach of the existing publications. Just as the move from hand drawn illustrations to photographs in the press altered the routine habits and assumptions regarding news images, the introduction of digital imaging, ushered in new technology that forced a fundamental change in the news industry. There can be no doubt that now a days, in a digital age, the photograph is no longer an irrefutable witness to the world and its events, if it ever was, thus making ethics the most important issue in photojournalism today.

A most blatant and widely recognized case was the computer enhancement of the TIME Magazine cover photo of O.J. Simpson. TIME took the mug shot of Simpson when he was arrested and changed it before using it on their cover. TIME darkened the Simpson photo creating a five o'clock shadow and a more menacing look; in addition they darken the top edges of the photograph and made the police numbers line up. In and editorial the next week , TIME's managing editor wrote, " The harshness of the mug shot- the merciless bright light, the stubble on Simpson's face, the cold specificity of the picture Ð'- had been subtly smoothed and shaped into an icon of tragedy." (Long 1). All the same TIME changed the photo from what it was a document, into what they wanted it to be. According to the Society of Professional Journalist and its code of ethics clearly states "never distort the content of news photos or video. TIME by manipulating this image was not seeking to report the truth. TIME was making an editorial statement and not reporting the news.

There are many degrees of changes that can be done electronically to a photograph. There are technical changes that deal only with the aspect of photography that make the photos more readable, such as a little dodging and burning, global color correction and contrast control. The Society of Professional Journalist and its code of ethics clearly state "Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible". These changes, akin to there darkroom counterpart, are neither ethical nor unethical- they are merely technical. Most sentences necessitate some editing or reorganization to make sense, and most photographs necessitate, in particular digital photographs, require some basic toning and preparation to meet production standards. Dodging and burning is part of that process.

The techniques did not begin with the invention of Adobe PhotoShop, the now dominant software program found on a desktop in most photojournalist. However PhotoShop did help the process become a lot easier making manipulation seamless and in effect virtually undetectable. "One must understand that there are several ways to do everything in PhotoShop. You can perform the dodge and burn procedure by three of four different means." says Kevin Connor, Director of Project Management for Photo and Digital Imaging at Adobe Systems, San Jose. California.

"It is correct that the dodge and burn tools, the crop tool, and the sponge tools in the tools palette were specifically designed to visually simulate the traditional photographic tools of the analogue (wet chemical) darkroom. The tools and features are designed to add or lessen the intensity, just as a photographer did in the darkroom. But anything you push far enough will eliminate detail. This is no different than the analogue darkroom experience," explained Connor. For Connor, "The only thing different is the intent of the photographer".

It is clear that introducing digital technology into the field of photojournalism has produced upheaval, frustration, and uncertainty and has irrevocably changed professional practice. Creating debate among photographers and such changes akin to when in July of 2004 The Board of Directors of the National Press Photographers Association unanimously adopted an updated code of ethics for the organization and its members.

"Photojournalist operate as trustees if the public. Our primary