In the article by Aaron Quinn, “Accepting manipulation or manipulating what is acceptable,” the issue of ‘photo editing’ and its role in current day journalism contribution is discussed and two questions in the article are addressed below:
1. What are the proper ethical guidelines for post-shoot photo manipulations (manipulations made after the photo has been taken)?
2. How much should we rely on intra-camera exposure calculations instead of post-shoot manipulations?
Aaron Quinn does state the fact that the manipulation of images through the use of modern day technology has led to rising levels of mistrust in the media and reporting, however also discusses the role played by intra-camera exposure calculations and the act of picture taking
…show more content…
Through this establishment, Quinn shows how the journalists have a moral obligation to provide accurate information to society, and the digital manipulation of images to deceive the said audience causes growing distrust in the media – thus affecting utility (the utilitarian aspect behind the necessity of providing ethical photographic information). The other philosophical doctrine analyzed is Kantian deontology. Quinn examines how the use of ‘dodge and burn’ editing is a violation of the truth due to the artificial lightening/darkening of pictures- pointing out the fact that journalists have a responsibility to essentially recreate reality, and anything that strays away from this premise enters the realm of deception and deceit and is therefore a lie. Finally, virtual theory is analyzed in the article. Aaron Quinn argues that virtue ethics are necessary in the field of journalism, and virtues such as truth telling, integrity and accuracy are important in order to allow journalists to make decisions whilst taking into account individual agent traits unlike the principles of …show more content…
Quinn argues that the lightening or darkening of images by running a mouse cursor over areas on a photo is the equivalent to telling a lie/manipulating the truth by quoting Sissela Bok, “…any intentionally deceptive message is stated.” Therefore, Quinn argues that the intention of the editing is to ultimately deceive the intended audience; even if the intention is to correct an imperfection. Quinn goes on to explain through this that the violation of Kantian deontology then comes into play as the act is still morally wrong even if the intention is well
...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.
Chris Master incorporates the ‘duty of journalists [as] to reshape information and get that information to the public’, while this is important and periodically essential, it is his broad knowledge tells us that ‘the best journalism is the journalism to challenge the orthodox, respectfully challenge the public opinion and occasionally deliver bad news’(pg 5). While this is almost evident in Masters’ book, but the fact he did not deliver these stories that seem perfectly fit for ‘today’s journalism’ he attains a kind of benevolence, and consideration for his subjects. As seen in his anonymity, which shows the reader how it is not worth the social and media torment of the journalistic process. Quite powerfully he delivers the calming words that many of us already know, perhaps by our own nature or experience: ‘In order for there to be good journalism, journalists need to find a balance between what they want to present and what the public wants’.
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
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.
Susan Sontag discusses the reality of the modern person’s addiction with “needing to have reality confirmed” by photos. Sontag says “we accept it as the camera records it” then goes to say “this is the opposite of understanding.” I agree with her wholeheartedly, as accepting photos as they are limits ones understanding of the world. The trust in photography led to the rise of pictures hoaxes, in which people take pictures out of context and assign it a new background; as well as Photoshop, which becomes increasingly popular as the years go by. Photoshop allows one to manipulate a photo to portray what they desire it to.
As a result, many photographers take pictures to keep society updated on the events that are happening around the world. However, many turn to the idea of manipulating images to garner awareness of the current events. Although there are many instances where many don’t realize that a photo has been altered, it brings into question, the concept of ethics. Personally when I look at a photograph I assume that the photo is a clear distinction of the event that had happened at the moment. However, when the photos becomes manipulated I feel as though the truth has been distorted. The reason being is because they I look at the image I start to create a pseudo reality of what might have taken place and I try to understand the symbolism and emotions of the photo. Once you distort these images it then brings into question about whether it is ethically okay to distort the image. Although some photo manipulations is considered okay by some, others disapprove on the idea because it deceives the public. Some examples in photos are manipulated is when people are trying to making someone or a product look more appealing. However, when a picture is being used for journalistic purposes and propaganda I definitely don’t approve of it. This reason is that you are deceiving the public from the truth. Furthermore, it brings into question the intentions of the photographer, is the photo that is being manipulated being made so to garner more attention to the
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
In Laura Mallonee’s article, “Infamously Altered Photos, Before and After Their Edits” she explains how photographic editing has been going on long before photoshop existed. “The images underscore the elusive, slippery quality of truth when it comes to photography” (Mallonee). In other words, with each and every edit made in modern photography today, a lie is told. In her article when she states this, she further elaborates about how when people post altered pictures everywhere; what is the point at
This essay is a summary of the article, “Accepting Manipulation or Manipulating What's Acceptable?” written by Aaron Quinn. The ethical issue the author addressed in this article is: what are the appropriate ethical guidelines for post-shoot photo manipulation, and to what extent should the public believe in the manipulation of images after intra-camera exposure? The author of this article concluded that photo-journalism or photo manipulations are the essential component of journalism. The author based this conclusion on ethical reasoning by relying on consequentialism, deontology and virtue theory. Lastly, this line of reasoning was duly supported by the author.
...image was found to be altered. (Fig. 6) was widely dispersed by email in 2001, the photograph is of a great white shark leaping out the water to take a bite of a soldier, nevertheless like the previous photo this was also proven fake. These examples show Similarity to the pre-digital era where photographers had no interest in documenting reality, but now it’s amateurs and professionals alike, whom will take a documentary photograph and manipulate it to conjure fantasies or imaginary scenes. Except unlike pre-digital, photojournalism has developed and no longer is manipulation tolerable in this sector, and it is the general public that has set this, people are searching for truth in photography, but trying to break up the truth from fabrication is difficult and pranksters and even journalists are proving that time and time again, we can't believe everything we see.
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
In extreme situations, journalists choose the angle they can find, tick the boxes to the news worthiness, but never having a stand. According to Kempf, journalists fulfill certain criteria of newsworthiness and fake empirical evidence, which implements propaganda and in the journalists’ defense “that it did not matter the pictures were faked since they only showed what people already ‘knew’ and since they served the goal of opening the eyes of the public” (Kempf 2002, p. 60). Various examples from the War on Terror, where journalists and reporters would fake evidence just to gain more audiences but examples like this could elevate the issues, and it is as if this responsibility of Journalism of Attachment only adds fuel to the fire and this is done in the name of peace (Kempf 2002).
media) is fundamentally important in understanding the mass media as an agent of those dominant in our society and the forces that motivate them in their exploration of the truth. How to use [IMAGE]? A qualitative analysis of the issues pertaining to journalism and the current Code of Ethics, utilizing information from a variety of different sources to obtain a vast body of knowledge. pertaining to journalism and the current code. Areas of Concern:.
An argument can be made that Journalism is one of the very few professions in the world of media that is handled with some sort of dignity and pride. After reading “The Elements of Journalism” by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, I realized how important journalism is to each and every one of us. Whether you’re a writer or a reader, the back and forth exchange between provider and consumer is extremely important in pushing society forward. Journalism after all is designed to challenge society, promote new ideas and spark conversation between one another. Despite the positives of journalism, there are issues that exist within the profession that cannot be excused and cannot be ignored.
Meyers, C. (2010). The 'Standard Journalism ethics: a philosophical approach? Oxford University Press. Nordenstreng. K. (1995)