Will Price
wpriceou@gmail
The use of photos is vital to our jobs in the media. They can reinforce the story at hand and bring a certain level of truth that words cannot with the audience. That being said, in the social media age, many photos can be manipulated and mislead the audience. As journalists, it is important that we are incredibly diligent when coming across viral media and investigate any photos or media we may use from another source. When editing our own photos, we must be careful to not change the photo in a way that significantly changes it's meaning, just like any information we come across and report out.
Photo editing technology has been around for the years and can be used as a tool to touch up photos and remove small blemishes. However, it can also be used to change the nature of the photo, undermining the use of the software and now undermining our credibility as journalists with our audience. One prominent example of this was a cover for The Economist magazine featuring a story about Barack Obama following the BP oil spill disaster. The cover edits out two people the former president was standing with on a pier, causing him to look more isolated and alone on the cover. This is a somewhat small change to the picture but can have a much different subtext to the eye of the reader.
Newsrooms need to be thoughtful about how they present photos to the general public and how any potential changes to the photos, whether it be digitally enhancing something, or removing it, or cropping the photo, all are important changes and need to be handled with care. Deputy editor of The Economist at the time, Emma Duncan, said she edited out the woman to the right because her presence could be "puzzling to the reader." Still, the image of Obama looking defeated during an ongoing national crisis can send a message to the people that the original photo did not contain.
No comments:
Post a Comment