Doctored Photographs: When They Are Immoral The modern world is full of photographs. They are used for ads, political campaigns, and magazines. However it can be hard to tell whether or not a photograph is real. Many are ‘doctored’ or altered in some way. These doctored photographs can be seemingly harmless, such as advertisements, but they can misrepresent a product or person. There is a fine line between what is ethical and what isn’t for doctored images. Photographs should never be altered in order to deceive individuals, damage someone’s reputation, or when they have a strong negative impact on self-esteem. However if doctored photographs are used for art or for minor touch-ups for advertisements that don’t misrepresent a product then …show more content…
Photoshop can be used to depict opponents in undesirable situations or to depict events which haven’t actually happened. There have been numerous political scandals where one candidate doctors a photograph of their opponent. In 2012 Wil Cardon, a Republican candidate for the senate, launched a campaign against U.S. Representative Jeff Flake by using doctored photos of Flake to imply that he opposed SB 1070. The pictures had been doctored to feature Flake standing with Obama (McCombs, "Flake: Doctored Photos 'Dishonest '."). Here the doctored photograph was meant to deceive voters into believing an opponent had a certain viewpoint. The pictures depicted a scenario which never happened and may not display the full truth. In this case the doctored photograph crossed the fine moral line. The article Is it Real, Or Is It Photoshoped? discusses the increasing concern of doctored before and after pictures presented to clients by physicians (Anthem Media Group). In this case the photograph is purposely trying to deceive a perspective client into believe that the procedure will be more effective than it actually is. The picture does not present the truth in a scenario where it is unethical not to present the truth. Doctored photographs are not only unethical when they are used deceptively for one’s gain, but also when they are used to destroy another’s …show more content…
They may even argue that in they are ethical in the situations already listed. I agree that there are some situations when doctored photos are completely acceptable. Sometimes they can be used as art such as Halsman’s photograph, The Dali Atomicus. There are also times when pictures are changed only slightly in order to improve the quality, such as lighting or darkening a photograph. In these cases the picture is not meant to misrepresent an opponent or product, harm a person’s reputation, or lower self-esteem. However doctored photographs can be immoral when used to deceive, even if the changes seem minute. An example would be the suspension of photographer Bryan Patrick from the Sacramento Bee due to minor changes made to some photographs. A Newstex article addressed several people who thought that the punishment did not match the crime. They stated that even though the changes were minor “a news photo must represent the truth” (Photo ethics 101). In order for the public to trust a news source to be honest about large details, they must first be honest about small details. Doctored photos are not always immoral, but they can easily be used unethically to deceive, ruin reputations, and lower
Means of posed pictures and the false idea of a morally right person often succeed in allowing the politician or person in a consumer world to exploit the feelings and trust of a person. Posed pictures often give something for people to base their feelings and trust off of but theses medias are foten out of context or missing the entire backstory or meanings for the picture. The ability to act differently and weave a personification of a morally right person to gain people's trust, often leads the audience to trust in a veil that is not the real person that they voted for. NOw when these ways are both wrong, they often lead the the entire trust being placed in the politician and the success of the politician. That is why i believe that the success of successful politicians are often because of the use of artificial medias and even though they are wrong, they are the most effective skill if a politician wants to become
...her and the more modern case of Brian Walski demonstrates the importance of ethics in the mass media. With the public dependent on photographers for images that will give an accurate and true representation of the facts, in some cases even leading to such important decisions as giving relief aid, waging war, or determining votes in an election, it is vitally important that journalistic images be true and unaltered likenesses of real persons and events. Even apparently innocent misrepresentations, designed to create a better image or better prove a point, can have serious consequences for the photographer, the subjects of the image, and the public. It is a reminder of the importance of honesty in all professions.
In this text readers will become aware of certain things regarding technology available for altering photos and of the ethical and epistemological issues those possibilities raise. Stated above, the young boy’s father Juan Miguel Gonzalez and his attorney presented photos to the U.S. Government that depict Elian smiling and laughing and loving life in Cuba. In this text Patterson and Wilkins discuss scenarios related to media personal changing pictures with technology advancements that make those changes possible. With these advancements was it possible that the father and his attorney had someone change photos of events to help their side of the legal issue? Was it possible that pictures posted by American Media personnel’s were altered to help support the U.S. from receiving any negative attention? The exact opposite of that approach is called eyewash. Eyewash is the use of stock photos of file footage to illustrate news stories, photos used regardless of the context of the original photograph and sometimes without consent of the subject. The day the INS invaded the Miami resident’s house, all twenty local newspapers used that day showed the image taken by a photographer of the agent pointing his automatic rifle at the terrified boy while he hid in the closet of the family’s home. Many other popular photos taken and used from that day
She further explained her opinion on the subject in her work what’s Photoshop Got to do with it? Another woman Elizabeth Perle believes that it's too late to consider taking a stand against Photoshop for fear of ruining the careers of actors, actresses, and models. That statement alone proves that society values physical perfection than the health and emotional well-being of people, specifically impressionable teenagers. There are girls everyday who are impacted by the media in one form or
Media is one of the biggest factor in shaping our identity and how we see ourselves. In “killing us softly” Jean Kilbourne explains the meaning of the advertisements and how women can never achieve the scale of perfection that these advertisements set. Jean explains that these advertisements are saying that you will be beautiful and all the men will love you if you look this certain way. The problem Jean mentions is that they can never look like the models shown in advertisements because not even the models themselves can look like that. During the film/speech she shows how digital editors Photoshop all the photos to fix the model’s flaws and then you see that the models in the ads are a completely different creation. The digital editors even showed the process of creating a complete perfect non-existing being. By that they mean that the models shown in some ads are actually a combination different facial features of 3-4 models. These fake beings are setting standards that are an impossibility to obtain. This type of media is affecting how we see ourselves. ...
Photography has been around for nearly 200 years and has advanced dramatically with the new technology. In 1826, when the first photograph was taken photography was a very basic art form, but soon after photographers figured out how to manipulate their photos. In today’s society, it is almost unheard of to look at photographs that are raw and unedited, but has it always been this way? Dating back to the first photograph in 1826 by Joseph Nicephore Niepce, photography seemed to be raw, but only a few decades after those photographers discovered they could alter their photos to make them more appealing (“Harry Ransom Center”). Over the past 200 years photos of all different subjects have been manipulated through history and technology seems to be the culprit.
In conclusion, authenticity has various meanings and connotations. Whether it is in a historical, expression or cultural context, authenticity is purely subjective and immeasurable. As Sontag puts it, “photographs alter and enlarge our notions what is worth looking at”. For example, when comparing that of David Lachapelle’s image to that of ‘The Girl in The Picture’ by Nick Ut taken during the Vietnam War. It does not suffice to say one is more or less authentic than the other. They represent two completely different reproductions of reality with divergent meanings and internal messages – essentially, they are their very own photo-realities.
"A photograph is not merely a substitute for a glance. It is a sharpened vision. It is the revelation of new and important facts." ("Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History."). Sid Grossman, a Photo League photographer expressed this sentiment, summarizing the role photography had on America in the 1940’s and 50’s. During this era, photojournalism climaxed, causing photographers to join the bandwagon or react against it. The question of whether photography can be art was settled a long time ago. Most major museums now have photography departments, and the photographs procure pretty hefty prices. The question of whether photojournalism or documentary photography can be art is now the question at hand. Art collectors are constantly looking to be surprised; today they are excited by images first seen in last week’s newspapers as photojournalism revels in the new status as art “du jour” or “reportage art”.
Avery common example to use for false advertisements is models. A model can accentuate and show off every corner of ther body and the advertisement may display or promise you “gorgeous looking skin”, or “the perfect hair within two weeks,” all for the sake of buying their product. Unless there is physical, hard evidence explaining how the product works, and how effective it is, then it would not be worth purchasing. Another thing that displays the misleading of manipulated advertisements is clothing lines depicted by models. Most everyone has heard of the famous Victoria’s Secret models and how robust and perfect their bodies are. Ritchie says that “...we see the “models” and the “logical” part of our brain recognizes that this is probably a manipulated image, but the “emotional” part of our brains don’t register this at all.” Thanks to modern day technology, it is very easy to get rid of imperfections and blemishes with the touch of a button, making any human body look impeccable. By doing these things, humans in general will believe that they are true, they will buy into the product only because they want the same results as depicted by the modes. Thus, resulting in false advertisement and an unsatisfied customer questioning their self worth. This type of manipulation is most commonly found in female attracted
In modern society there is more and more digital editing without the knowledge of consumers. Currently there are various reasons for why women develop negative body image, low-self-esteem and eating disorders. According to Naomi Wolf in her novel “Beauty Myth”, one of the many reasons women obtain concerns with their bodies is due to the universal images of young female bodies presented through advertisements in fashion magazines. Advertisements in magazines are altering and shaping the desires of men and women. Magazines sell viewers images of beautiful, skinny, flawless confident young women. When people are constantly antagonized with the magazine industry’s ideal of “perfect beauty” the viewer’s then, subconsciously believe these images to be true and begin to form biases about what they themselves should look like and what other people must also look like. People who view magazines get mislead by advertisers because they are unaware that all the images displayed are digitally altered through Photoshop and airbrushing. Today’s magazines are formed completely on false ideals of flawless beauty and unattainable body images, to prevent women and men from falling victim to the magazine’s deceitful images we as a society need to become aware and educate ourselves.
In order to win the race, brands sometimes exaggerate the result of their product to win more customers by using external tools or software. In the digital world everything can be done to a photo, and sometimes it changes the meaning of the image. In many areas of advertising (such as the fashion beauty world, health, fitness, diet pills, cos...
Throughout the recent years, Photoshop has become a widespread phenomenon amongst the world. With the rapidly developing inventions of camera’s and devices with cameras on them; posting pictures on social media has become extremely popular. Along with that, the pressure to appear perfect in said pictures has increased dramatically. Society has become exceedingly focused on the idea of perfect, and what perfect looks like. Especially now, with growing photo sharing phone applications such as Instagram, photo editing is becoming even more popular. Photoshop has proven to have many beneficial uses; however, it also has very negative consequences such as false perceptions, and misleading people.
When using Photoshop on a person to “perfect” the image the editors get quite drastic; in a recent cover for Rolling Stone Katy Perry was shown sitting on a bed in just a bra and underwear, seems like the average cover right? Well yes it is like every other magazine except this one had its pre-photoshop cover leaked as well. In the above picture we can see that the editors of this photoshop slimmed Katy down, enhanced her breasts, removed moles, made her skin look glossy, and even removed the sock on her right leg. Its this nit picking that causes harm to our society and to our communities. It seems as though everyday we hear of another young girl committing suicide because she felt worthless.
In today 's society, people have a very skewed perception of beauty. People are exposed to so many advertisements and pictures that are photo-shopped each day that many do not even realize what they are looking at. They are seeing an image of something that is not real; something that is not even possible to obtain. Photoshop has an outrageously negative effect on men and women in society, creating an unattainable image of perfection.
Photography is a mindful medium of expression, perspective, interpretation and can sometimes be truth. The changes throughout the history of photography have changed how people see the image they're looking at. In the 19th century, they were no editing options or software of any kind. You just go through the process and take the photo and people could easily tell it was real. Of course it would a shock to see what was once a real life event in that time period, but then transferred on paper "capturing" the moment itself. The truth could easily been seen, now in the 21st century, most of that has changed. There are