Visual images can say a lot. They can so effortlessly tell a story, convey an emotion, or transport a viewer into another world. Photography can be found everywhere, from film and books to newspapers and tv. Photos can cross through space and time, becoming beacons of culturally, historically and socially significant moments. However, with the rise of digital editing and photo editing software, how much of this story can be rewritten?
Journalists have ruminated on the ethics of photos for a long time, looking at how much, if any, of a photo should be edited. From enhancing the colors, to editing out objects in the background, to even making composite images, there have been several instances to look at throughout the journalism profession at varying levels of seriousness. While some journalists feel that minimal edits further enhance a photo's impact and cinematic quality, others refrain that any such editing is harmful to the integrity the image, which should hold accuracy above all. While both sides have a point, the question seems to be on how to balance it. While some color correction can help to more accurately reproduce the scene as the photographer saw it, taking out people or adding in elements can lean too close to altering the photo’s actuality. There seems to be lines between journalism for information and entertainment, with many media outlets favoring the former. However, as Ian Bogost of The Atlantic remarks, even a photo (or video) taken at its most honest can still sway its message. The angle, the subject, the focus, and what's not shown, can sometimes have an impact on the message the photo portrays.
This calls into consideration the context of the photo. Russian filmmaker Lev Kuleshov, is known for his pioneering work in the film industry, with special interest in areas of film theory. The Kuleshov Effect, named after him, looks to demonstrate if there is any implied meaning in the way images or videos are presented. Kuelshov started out making silent films, which have an even more intrinsic connection with the visual. Alfred Hitchcock was a big fan of his work, and incorporates this simple yet powerful technique throughout this films. This clip below show him talking about it, showing how one can achieve different meanings based on the order of clips in a film.
Bringing this back to photo journalism, it shows how the image and the context it's in has the chance to change its meaning. Just like a quote out of context would be most likely frowned upon in journalism, so too can similar ethics be applied to ensuring that a photo accurately and fully represents a news story as best it can. The news may not always be cinematic, or photo perfection, yet it deserves to be shown so that its readers can make their own conclusions.
In addition to news teams assuring that their own photos maintain this standard, there are even several websites that focus on debunking myths and checking the validity of things claimed in news stories or photos. Several of these sites are partnered with the IFCN, International Fact-Checking Network, a part of the Poynter Institute. It outlines its own code of ethics, and sites can become an official member by adhering to these principles, which uphold transparency, fairness and truth.
Love your discussion on the ethics of the aesthetics that go into photojournalism! This a common debate in the industry and also among my peers. I think there's a stark difference in what is considered journalism in America compared to other countries as well. Places like Denmark allow (and encourage) more artistic looking work in terms of tones, colors, and editing, while America promotes a more straight forward clean-cut aesthetic. I personally love a good balance of the two!
ReplyDeletekr208215@ohio.edu