Ethics in Photojournalism

INTRODUCTION:

Pictures are worth 1,000 words – in the newspaper business that equals about 25 inches of print. Images are one of the most powerful forms of communication, especially in journalism. One image or sound can summarize an event or person or motivate a nation; one image can upset people more than endless pages of print on the subject.

In the early days of newspaper journalism the photojournalist’s role was relatively straightforward. Armed with a camera he captured a moment in time – a reality. Back at the newsroom he spent hours in the darkroom mixing chemicals and perfecting his art. The photojournalist emerged with a snippet of reality, ready to show the truth to the public. The development of news photography in the 19th century supported claims by newspapers that they reported events as they happened, objectively.

Today, the ethics of photojournalism goes far beyond the ethics of the newspaper photo. It includes the millions of news-related images that appear on our televisions, cell phones, computer screens and other multi-media devices. We are an image-saturated world.

With these advances photojournalism has become more complicated technologically and ethically. The claim that photographs and images simply “mirror” events is no longer plausible. Moreover, photojournalists face tough ethical decisions on what to shoot, what to use, and if and when images can be altered.

In newsrooms, digital technology has all but eliminated the cumbersome process of film developing. Digital images are easily transmitted, raising the demand for images. With fresh demand comes increasing competition for the best, most dramatic photo.

ETHICAL ISSUES IN PHOTOJOURNALISM

Among the main issues of photojournalism -- in newspapers, on TV, or on the Internet -- are:

1. Manipulation of digital images

Software such as Adobe PhotoShop and its imitators has created a new age of photography. With the click of a mouse you can create a new ‘truth’ by changing, in an instant, the size, shape and color of the image and the distance between objects. Objects can be removed from the image, or inserted into the picture. For example, if you are a hockey photographer, you could add a puck to the scene of a goalmouth scramble -- if the real puck was obscured by a player. If you are a travel photographer, you can reduce the distance of the pyramids in your image so they fit the cover page of your magazine.

Imagine this conversation between the photojournalist and his editor: “Blur her eyes a bit to give the illusion of tears – you know the public loves drama – and while you’re at it, cut out the fourth child, no one has to know about him, three children is enough to make a point.”

2. Intrusion into privacy

The development of long-range lens and the demand for attention-grabbing photos combine to make privacy a major ethical issue. When is it legitimate to take pictures of people in private moments? Should photojournalists capture images of politicians, movie stars and other public figures in private spaces? Should photojournalists take shots of families in grief, or victims of tragedy? The public perception of the journalist, and of the news media in general, has suffered from unjustified intrusions into privacy. The ethical question is: When is intrusion justified?

3. Graphic or shocking images

How graphic should -- or must -- images be to tell the news story? If news outlets use graphic pictures of war, they are accused of exploiting the pain of others. If they avoid graphic photos, they are accused of “sanitizing” the conflict. What criteria should guide photo decisions -- local or community standards? Newsworthiness? Dramatic impact? A commitment to tell the whole truth?

ETHICAL GUIDELINES

Ethical guidelines have begun to address the new problems facing photojournalists. Many editors and responsible news organizations refuse to publish altered photographs. Photos that have been digitally altered are now labeled montages or photo illustrations. The technology of photojournalism may have changed, but its truth-telling essence can still remain.

" Journalists should . . . never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible.

VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE

After a gruesome image of dead or grieving victims of a tragic event is presented to the public in either the print or screen media, many viewers are often repulsed and offended by the picture. Nevertheless, violence and tragedy are staples of Indian journalism. "If it bleeds, it leads" is a popular, unspoken sentiment in many newsrooms. The reason for this obvious incongruity is that a majority of viewers are attracted and intrigued by such stories. Photojournalists who win Pulitzer Prizes and other international competitions are almost always witness to excruciatingly painful human tragedies that nevertheless get published or broadcast. It is as if viewers want to see violent pictures, but through gaps in the fingers in front of their face.

Editors need to be sure that images of murder or automobile victims are really necessary to tell the story. Journalists often cite the reason for using such visual messages as a way to warn others of the dangers of modern living or to urge drivers to watch the speed limit. Another, perhaps more honest reason, is to avoid being scooped by a rival media organization. Despite well-rehearsed explanations, sensational images of victims of violence are shown as much for economic as utilitarian reasons. The media concentration on criminal activity creates an exaggerated perception of crime in the minds of viewers. Rather than focusing on bloody body bags, journalists need to explain the underlying social forces that cause such tragic events to occur.

RIGHT TO PRIVACY

Privacy concerns are almost always voiced by ordinary citizens or celebrities who are suddenly thrust in front of the unblinking lens of a camera because of connection to some sensational news story. Seldom do you hear viewers complain about violating someone else's right to privacy. Private citizens have much more strictly enforced rights to their own privacy than celebrities who often ask for media attention. Not surprisingly, celebrities bitterly complain when they are the subject of relentless media attention because of some controversial allegation.

PICTURE MANIPULATIONS

Picture and subject manipulations have been a part of photography since it was first invented. But because of computer technology, digital manipulations are relatively easy to accomplish, hard to detect and perhaps more alarming, alter the original image so that checking the authenticity of the picture is impossible. Some critics have predicted that in a few years, images -- whether still or moving -- will not be allowed in trials as physical evidence because of the threat to their veracity created by digital alterations.

Cameras and the images they produce are naively thought by many to never lie. But because humans operate the machine, technical, composition and content manipulations are unavoidable. Computer technology did not start the decline in the credibility of pictures, but it has hastened it. Photographic darkrooms are quickly being replaced by computer workstation lightrooms. But as long as photojournalists do not subtract or add parts of a picture's internal elements, almost any other manipulation once accomplished in a photographic darkroom is considered ethical for news-editorial purposes.

Two factors may guard against a further erosion of credibility in visual messages: Reputation of the media organization that publishes or broadcasts images and the words that accompany the manipulated picture.

Credibility is not an inherent quality of a particular picture, but a concept based on tradition, story choices, design considerations and reader perception of the company or individual that produces the image.

Words are also vital in assuring the credibility of a news organization and a picture. If a photojournalist or art director is tempted to combine parts from two separate pictures to create a third picture, the reader needs to know that such an action has taken place. The cutline for the image should include the details of the manipulation while the image itself should be labeled an illustration -- not a news-editorial picture. Such an addition would at least solve one aspect of the ethical problem -- letting the reader know of the illustrative technique.

However, a larger question remains: In this age of digital manipulation and desktop publishing, why do computer operators feel the need to turn news-editorial photographs into illustrations? Journalism professionals need to face the issue of photojournalism images being replaced by illustrations and not concern themselves so much with the tool that makes that ethical problem topical.

CODE OF ETHICS FOR PHOTOJOURNALISTS

1.      Associated Press

•         AP pictures must always tell the truth. We do not alter or digitally manipulate the content of a photograph in any way.

•         The content of a photograph must not be altered in Photoshop or by any other means. No element should be digitally added to or subtracted from any photograph. The faces or identities of individuals must not be obscured by Photoshop or any other editing tool. Only retouching or the use of the cloning tool to eliminate dust on camera sensors and scratches on scanned negatives or scanned prints are acceptable.

•         Minor adjustments in Photoshop are acceptable. These include cropping, dodging and burning, conversion into gray¬scale, and normal toning and color adjustments that should be limited to those minimally necessary for clear and accurate reproduction (analogous to the burning and dodging previously used in darkroom processing of images) and that restore the authentic nature of the photograph. Changes in density, contrast, color and saturation levels that substantially alter the original scene are not acceptable. Backgrounds should not be digitally blurred or eliminated by burning down or by aggressive toning. The removal of “red eye” from photographs is not permissible.

•         When an employee has questions about the use of such methods or the AP’s requirements and limitations on photo editing, he or she should contact a senior photo editor prior to the transmission of any image.

•         On those occasions when we transmit images that have been provided and altered by a source — the faces obscured, for example — the caption must clearly explain it. Transmitting such images must be approved by a senior photo editor.

•         Except as described herein, we do not stage, pose or re-enact events. When we shoot video, environmental portraits, or photograph subjects in a studio care should be taken to avoid, misleading viewers to believe that the moment was spontaneously captured in the course of gathering the news. In the cases of portraits, fashion or home design illustrations, any intervention should be revealed in the caption and special instructions box so it can¹t be mistaken as an attempt to deceive.

2.      National Press Photographers Association

Visual journalists and those who manage visual news productions are accountable for upholding the following standards in their daily work:

•         Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.

•         Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.

•         Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects. Avoid stereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presenting one’s own biases in the work.

•         Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifiable need to see.

•         While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.

•         Editing should maintain the integrity of the photographic images’ content and context. Do not manipulate images or add or alter sound in any way that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.

•         Do not pay sources or subjects or reward them materially for information or participation.

•         Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage.

•         Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other journalists.

3.      National Press Photographers Association

•         Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.

•         Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.

•         Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects. Avoid stereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presenting one’s own biases in the work.

•         Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifi able need to see.

•         While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.

•         Editing should maintain the integrity of the photographic images’ content and context.

•         Do not manipulate images or add or alter sound in any way that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.

•         Do not pay sources or subjects or reward them materially for information or participation.

•         Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage.

•         Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other journalists.

PHOTO-JOURNALISM ETHICS IN THE DIGITAL AGE

The transition from traditional to digital photography has brought new ethical challenges to photo-journalists. The widespread availability of image manipulation technology poses difficult questions for photo-journalists and those who depend on them to document events. Widely publicized photo tampering scandals have dented public confidence in the profession and so number strategies have been proposed for grappling with the ethical issues surrounding image manipulation. However, the challenges posed by the new technologies are complex, and their analysis, rather than yielding simple solutions, demands a closer examination of society’s relationship with the printed image. Digital photography and traditional film-based photography are very different. When light passes through a camera and falls onto film it has an effect on chemicals on the film.

When the film is processed it produces a negative image of the scene that was photographed. When this negative is printed, light passes through the negative onto paper that is sensitive to light. This paper is developed to reproduce the photographed scene. Many copies of the scene can be printed form the same negative. Digital photography is very different. Light passes through the optics of the camera like in a film camera, but instead of falling onto film it falls onto an array of sensors.

A charge is built up in each sensor depending on the intensity of the light. To generate an image the charge from each sensor is recorded as a number. The image is stored as a grid of picture elements or pixels. These pixels form a mosaic of tiny rectangles that, when viewed from a distance, reproduce the photographed scene. Since the color of each pixel can easily be represented by a number, copying the numbers is all that is required to make a perfect copy of the image. Digital photography differs from film-based photography in two fundamental ways. With digital photography there is no original negative that can be used as a reference.

More problematically, the pixels that make up a digital image can be easily changed. Just like the tiles in a mosaic can be removed and replaced with those of a different color, so too, portions of a digital image can be seamlessly removed or altered. The ease with which digital images can be changed has caused concern in professions where the accuracy of images is important. Journalism has been particularly troubled by the issue and there have been a number of widely publicized cases where photographs have been manipulated.

The ethical problems surround image editing is not just a problem for journalists. Seeing is believing for millions of people in the world and so image editing presents a problem for society in general. Most readers assess the credibility of what they read based on their opinion of the source. This is especially true in countries like France and Italy, for example, where newspapers wear their political allegiances on their sleeves.

Even in cultures where newspapers are traditionally objective, most readers still accept that you cannot always believe what you read and that the author may have a particular bias or agenda. However, the most skeptical of readers is inclined to believe her own eyes when shown a photograph of an event. The belief that the camera never lies is widely held and readers are more likely to believe a picture than a written account. The problems with image manipulation in photo-journalism are even more complex when we consider photographs as historical records.

CONCLUSOION:

Media critics and viewers question the use of gruesome images, dozens of photographers hounding celebrities, picture manipulations that present misleading views, visual messages that perpetuate negative stereotypes of individuals from various multicultural groups, and images that blur the distinction between advertising and journalism.

Because images evoke almost immediate emotional responses among viewers, pictures have tremendous impact. With well-chosen words, visual messages combine to educate, entertain and persuade. But the flip side to such visual power is that images can also offend shock, mislead, stereotype and confuse.