The Evolving Status of Photojournalism

In an article entitled, "The Evolving Status of Photojournalism Education," author Claude Cookman discusses the effects of photographic truth on the field of photojournalism. While the majority of the article discusses the changes that photojournalism has seen as a result of digital technology, we are more concerned with the section of this article focusing on the ethical issues of digital photography. Due to the fact that digital technologies allow photographers to manipulate images subtly and seamlessly, it is now virtually impossible for the untrained eye to spot alterations. According to the author, "leaders in photojournalism saw this new capability for seamless manipulation as a threat to the credibility of the photographic image and thus to the profession [of photojournalism]." In other words, the problem of photographic truth takes on ethical connotations when it enters the field of photojournalism. This is not to say that the ethics of photographic truth are not important to those in other fields, such as artistic photography. I am merely suggesting that because credibility is a major asset of photojournalism, it is important for this field to maintain a strict code of ethics relating to photographic truth. In reaction to this concern about photographic truth, the National Press Photographers Association added to its "code of ethics a strong prohibition against digital manipulation. [Stating that] in documentary photojournalism, it is wrong to alter the content of a photograph in any way that deceives the public." In addition, the NPPA considers it necessary to label any manipulated images as such. Taking the NPPA code of ethics into consideration, I find it interesting that TIME Magazine was able to publish an digitally altered mug-shot photo of O.J. Simpson on it's cover (seen above, left). When the TIME cover is compared to a Newsweek cover bearing the same original image (seen above, right), it is clear that the TIME photo was altered to make Simpson look darker and much more sinister. Now, the changes made here are not drastic, but it would be impossible for a reader to know that this image was altered if he or she had no reference to the original image. In addition, even though the alterations are not drastic, the message that the viewer gets from this altered image is drastically different from the message received from the original photo. Therefore, we can see that this TIME cover is a case of pure photographic lying, thus the image should be labeled as a manipulated photo. From this altered TIME cover, we can also see the extremely important role truth ethics play in maintaining photojournalistic credibility.