Photojournalism

“A picture is worth a thousand words”

The advent of digital manipulation has brought this old saying to a measly little wives’ tale, or has it? Does a photograph lose words when it is manipulation or is the story enhanced as the image has been?

For most the question is not about content of the image, but intent of the alterations.

Ethical codes are now enforced throughout journalism organizations delineating the requirements of ethical news. For example, the standard of “accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects” is the first on the NPPA’s Code of Ethics (1), which is different than the NPPA’s bylaws. This code, as well as similar ones, is intended to result in “the highest quality in all forms of photojournalism and to strength public confidence in the profession.” In recent years, the photojournalism profession and the accuracy of new sources has come into question in the public eye.

Under this code photos may however be edited, but they must “maintain the integrity of the photographic image’s content and context” (1). In the world of journalism a photograph is considered first hand data, as important as an eye witness and as valid as a documented piece of evidence. There is a relationship established between the author (news provider) and the recipient (news viewer) that is based on truth and integrity; any manipulation (that is recognizable) could damper, undermine or even break that relationship.

Credibility is a challenge the journalism profession is facing with the new easily accessible technologies. Integrity can be maintained by making sure the context of the photo and the news associated with the photo are the same. In other words, if a manipulated photo is used to make a widely known parody of a person, product or event, then it is clear to the viewer that this photograph is not supposed to be taken as the truth. On the other hand, if the information is a news story, an altered image might give an inappropriate message. Authority of the news source may also be questioned if the photograph is not a fair and accurate representation of the information being presented or if it deceives the reader (1).

Webster’s University Journal (5) generally allows brightness/contrast adjustments, burning and dodging, color correction, crops due to insufficient layout space, and retouching of possible dust and scratches. However, adding, moving or removing objects from the original picture is not accepted. Color change, cropping to alter meaning, change in original orientation and mirroring the image, while not allowed, are fine lines to cross. These alterations are gray due to the editors’ opinions. For instance, if a person has seen the original image and it is cropped to make it half the size the meaning is now altered. However, another viewer may interpret the cropped image with a meaning other than the original.