By: Brooke Robinette
Photojournalism gives the reader or viewer a glimpse into the
news article or program they are watching. These additions to stories can help
the viewer gauge the scene and provide insight into the setting of an event. Digital
photography and editing software have given photojournalists the means to
enhance their photography and direct the viewer’s attention within photographs.
The lines between enhancing and greatly altering photographs in journalism are often blurred, however, which can create a debate within the industry.
A 2015 article
in the New York Times illustrates the different voices within the debate of
editing in photojournalism. A remarkable 20% of entries in the World Press
Photo Competition for that year were disqualified according to the article. Michelle
McNally, assisting managing editor at The New York Times and the chairwoman for
the contest in 2015, said that “a large number were rejected for removing or
adding information to the image, for example, like toning that rendered some
parts so black that entire objects disappeared from the frame”. Toning, the practice of lightening or darkening
an image, was used in this instance to alter the images so drastically in the
minds of the judges that it completely altered the original content.
Another perspective in the New York Times article comes from
a photographer whose work was disqualified from the contest. This photographer agreed
to have his views published in the article with the promise of anonymity. As a “seasoned”
photographer, their view is that all images are subject to the intent of the
photographer, so no image is without manipulation. The photographer states, “I believe
that many of us adopted certain techniques, not to change the truth of what we
are trying to articulate, but to make our images stand out from the crowd.” Their
theory suggests that all mediation, cropping, artificial lighting, and composition
are manipulations and therefore photo editing is simply another tool for
photojournalists. The question remains, however, when does photo manipulation go
too far?
According to an article
by Karen Dybis from the Center for Digital Ethics and Policy, all editing
except for cropping should be considered unacceptable in photojournalism. Dybis
says, “A photo cannot be changed digitally in any way other than cropping it
for size for it to be considered true, accurate and fair to the viewer. Period.
There is no way around this if you want to gain or keep the public’s trust and
respect.” Dybis goes on to explain that photojournalism cannot consist of
photographs that have been set up: “If the story didn’t happen when the
photographer was there, there was no story.” Not setting up a photograph is a
standard that photojournalists seem to agree upon but cropping as the only option
for editing may seem to limit many in the industry.
The ethics of photo manipulation in photojournalism have largely
been left up to each publication’s editors who often take their guidance from The
National Press Photographers Association Code
of Ethics and the Associated Press Code
of Ethics for Photojournalists. The AP’s code says “minor adjustments
in Photoshop are acceptable.” These adjustments include “cropping, dodging and
burning, conversion into grayscale, and normal toning and color adjustments
that should be limited to those minimally necessary for clear and accurate reproduction.” The wording “minimally necessary” can mean different things to different people.
The industry must rely on their interpretation of these ethical codes, and these
interpretations can vary widely.
No comments:
Post a Comment