Informational Photography Is Unethical

541 Words2 Pages

Images hold power. Consider reading an article online. While reading, your eye may be drawn to the images around it. Some of the images are clearly manipulative, such as ads. Others, like the ones concerning the article you’re reading, seem to be much more objective. However can we really say these images are objective? Images have always been manipulated to shed a better or worse light on the subject matter. This happen in the cold war when Joseph Stalin edited individuals out of pictures, making it seem as if they had never existed. This also happened in ancient Egypt, where rulers were given much more attractive faces on their Sarcophagi then they had in real life. It still occurs now. The advent of Photoshop has made these manipulations more convincing and ever more prevalent. Are these manipulations ethical? Is presenting an image is an objective representation of an event when, in fact, it has been altered a morally acceptable practice? I would argue that it is unethical to manipulate an image when being …show more content…

Informational photography is a photo taken with the intent of illustrating or displaying an event. An artistic photo is a photo that has been created for artistic value or intent. An informational photo may be an artistic photo as well but an artistic photo may not be an informational photo. This is because art is inherently subjective; it cannot be used to illustrate an objective point in news related context. How you interpret a piece is dependent upon your own experience and past. It can mean one thing to you and hold an entirely different meaning to someone else. A piece of art can intentionally manipulate your perceptions and ideals, simply to prove it can, or perhaps to make a point about society. An optical illusion manipulates your perception for the sake of doing so. How you interpret the meaning of a piece is dependent upon your own

Open Document