All About Journalism

Below are links to journalism related articles on this blog.  This was a page, now its a post (due to the new design...and I can't revert...at the moment)  So...check back once in a while to see what is new!

Propaganda: Egypt Opens Gazan Borders
When first read the article  “Egypt Gazan Borders Opens Permanently “Egypt Gazan Borders Opens Permanently” on the Huffington Post, I was ready to go outside and dance in the streets and then I wondered why others were not going outside and dancing? This was good news!

Propaganda and Historical Events

History is defined as, “a record of narrative description of past events”, “all that is remembered of the past as preserved in writing; or images; a body of knowledge”...

Ethics in the age of digital photography/altering images (NPPA Article)

In one of the early Digital Conferences, the Rev. Don Doll, S.J. pointed out that there are degrees of changes that can be done electronically to a photograph....

Ethics in the age of digital photography/personal taste (NPPA article)

Honest photographs can have an ethical dimension when it concerns the personal ethics of the photographer. Did the photographer violate some ethical standard in the process of making the picture?...

Photojournalism code of ethics (NPPA)

Visual journalists operate as trustees of the public. Our primary role is to report visually on the significant events and varied viewpoints in our common world....

Copyright SBrannonPhotography © 2011

Documentary Photography Lesson 2: Altering Images, How far can we go?

"In documentary photojournalism, it is wrong to alter the content of a photograph in any way (electronically, or in the darkroom) that deceives the public."  The motto of the NPPA.

Brian Walski’s photographs in the Los Angeles Times, lead to his dismissal for compositing two images from Iraq by using the “burning” or “dodging tool” The Charlotte Observer rescinded three images in the Pictures of the Year awards given to Patrick Schneider because he removed background information from certain images, through excessive adjustments in Photoshop.  Although the conclusion was that Schneider did not “intend” to deceive the public, but “he went over the line in the use of some techniques which altered the backgrounds in ways that left us uncomfortable.” Quoted by the NCPPA.

Schneider used the “hand of God” burns, enhancing the colors of a sunrise photo…which resulted in basically a made-up image.

The debate is was that enough to dismiss the award?  The story did not change.  I agree with the NCPPA and the NPPA in their decision.  Yes, I agree with those who oppose their decision based on the fact that the story did not change.  But that is not what the NCPPA was basing their decision upon.  It was based on the extensive use of altering images, changing colors and removing backgrounds.  I am a member of the NPPA, and I would not dare, alter an image to such an extent.  So what if the sunrise was not as bright and yellow/orange and it should (?)/could have been.  So what if the fire was not as bright red/orange enough to make the image esthetic enough for the viewer to marvel at it.  The image was good, in the Raw context.  However, removing backgrounds?  For me that crosses the line much more than enhancing colors.

The talent with photojournalism or documentary photography is the RAW image.  The challenge is in the ability to generate a story, using framing and composing, So what if I take an image of a world leader and in the background are other camera people.  One cannot truly avoid this event in the world we live in today.  Viewing the other photographers in the background, IS part of the story.  The man is famous!  Everyone wants to snap a shot of him if they get the chance.  If one can succeed snapping the shot, without other faces surrounding the world leader, then….you have a classy image.  This is the challenge.  The story.  The real story.

In part 3 I will discuss the historical problems of using photojournalism and documentary photography as a propaganda machine…this is where the true problem lies.

Ethics in the Age of Digital Photography/Changes to Photographs

In one of the early Digital Conferences, the Rev. Don Doll, S.J. pointed out that there are degrees of changes that can be done electronically to a photograph. There are technical changes that deal only with the aspects of photography that make the photo more readable, such as a little dodging and burning, global color correction and contrast control. These are all part of the grammar of photography, just as there is a grammar associated with words (sentence structure, capital letters, paragraphs) that make it possible to read a story, so there is a grammar of photography that allows us to read a photograph. These changes (like their darkroom counterparts) are neither ethical nor unethical - they are merely technical.

Changes to content can be Accidental or Essential (this is an old Aristotelian distinction)- Essential changes change the meaning of the photograph and accidental changes change useless details but do not change the real meaning. Some changes are obviously more important than others. Accidental changes are not as important as Essential changes, but both kinds are still changes.

If you had a photograph of a bride and groom and removed the groom, this would constitute an essential change because it would change the meaning of the photograph. (In fact, there are companies that will provide this service if you get a divorce. I guess the wedding book would end up looking like the bride got all dressed up and married herself.)

In the photos of the ladies on the parade float, the first photo has a set of wires running behind the ladies. In the second photo, the lines have been removed.




 


It takes only a few seconds with the cloning tool in PhotoShop to remove these lines. Removing the lines is an Accidental change, a change of meaningless details. If we had changed the flag to a Confederate flag, or removed a couple of the ladies, this would have changed the meaning of the photo and it would have been an essential change. But if we just remove the lines, what is the big deal? Who is harmed? As far as I am concerned, we are all harmed by any lie, big or small.

I do not think the public cares if it is a little lie or a big lie As far as they are concerned, once the shutter has been tripped and the moment has been captured on film, in the context of news, we no longer have the right to change the content of the photo in any way. Any change to a news photo - any violation of that moment - is a lie. Big or small, any lie damages your credibility.

The reason I get so adamant when I discuss this issue is that the documentary photograph is a very powerful thing and its power is based on the fact that it is real. The real photograph gives us a window on history; it allows us to be present at the great events of our times and the past. It gets its power from the fact that it represents exactly what the photographer saw through the medium of photography. The raw reality it depicts, the verisimilitude makes the documentary photo come alive. Look at the photo of Robert Kennedy dying on the floor of the hotel in California; look at the works of David Douglas Duncan or the other great war photographers; look at the photo of Martin Luther King martyred on the balcony of a motel in Memphis. The power of these photographs comes from the fact they are real moments in time captured as they happened, unchanged. To change any detail in any of these photographs diminishes their power and turns them into lies. They would no longer be what the photographer saw but what someone else wanted the scene to be. The integrity of the Moment would be destroyed in favor of the editorial concept being foisted, as is the case in the O. J. Simpson TIME cover.

Ethics in the Age of Digital Photography / Personal Taste

Honest photographs can have an ethical dimension when it concerns the personal ethics of the photographer. Did the photographer violate some ethical standard in the process of making the picture?

For example, take the very famous photo of the young child dying in Sudan while a vulture stands behind her, waiting. It was taken by Kevin Carter who won a Pulitzer Prize for the photo (a photo that raised a lot of money for the relief agencies). He was criticized for not helping the child; he replied there were relief workers there to do that. After receiving his Pulitzer, Kevin Carter returned to Africa and committed suicide. He had a lot of problems in his life but, with the timing of the sequence of events, I cannot help thinking there is a correlation between his photographing the child and his suicide.

This is the kind of choice all journalists will face some time in his or her career; maybe not in the extreme situation that Carter faced, but in some way, we all will be faced with choices of helping or photographing. Some day we will be at a fire or a car accident and we will be called upon to put the camera down and help. It is a good idea to think about these issues in advance because when the hour comes, it will come suddenly and we will be asked to make a choice quickly.

Here is the principle that works for me. It is not a popular one and it is one that many journalists disagree with but it allows me to sleep at night. If you have placed yourself in the position where you can help, you are morally obligated to help. I do not ask you to agree with me. I just want you to think about this and be prepared; at what point do you put the camera down and help? At what point does your humanity become more important than your journalism?

Photojournalism Code of Ethics

Visual journalists operate as trustees of the public. Our primary role is to report visually on the significant events and varied viewpoints in our common world. Our primary goal is the faithful and comprehensive depiction of the subject at hand. As visual journalists, we have the responsibility to document society and to preserve its history through images.

Photographic and video images can reveal great truths, expose wrongdoing and neglect, inspire hope and understanding and connect people around the globe through the language of visual understanding. Photographs can also cause great harm if they are callously intrusive or are manipulated.

This code is intended to promote the highest quality in all forms of visual journalism and to strengthen public confidence in the profession. It is also meant to serve as an educational tool both for those who practice and for those who appreciate photojournalism. To that end, The National Press Photographers Association sets forth the following.

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

   1. Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.

   2. Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.

   3. 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.

   4. 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.

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

   6. 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.

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

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

   9. Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other journalists.

Ideally, visual journalists should:

   1. Strive to ensure that the public's business is conducted in public. Defend the rights of access for all journalists.

   2. Think proactively, as a student of psychology, sociology, politics and art to develop a unique vision and presentation. Work with a voracious appetite for current events and contemporary visual media.

   3. Strive for total and unrestricted access to subjects, recommend alternatives to shallow or rushed opportunities, seek a diversity of viewpoints, and work to show unpopular or unnoticed points of view.

   4. Avoid political, civic and business involvements or other employment that compromise or give the appearance of compromising one's own journalistic independence.

   5. Strive to be unobtrusive and humble in dealing with subjects.

   6. Respect the integrity of the photographic moment.

   7. Strive by example and influence to maintain the spirit and high standards expressed in this code. When confronted with situations in which the proper action is not clear, seek the counsel of those who exhibit the highest standards of the profession. Visual journalists should continuously study their craft and the ethics that guide it.

Ethics in the Age of Digital Photography / Visual lies

It is time to get back to the theme of this report - the ethics involved with the use of computers to process images.

I like the Weekly World News. It provides a constant source of photos for these discussions about ethics. One of the more famous front pages shows a space alien shaking hands with President Clinton. It is a wonderful photo, guaranteed to make the career of any photographer who manages to get an exclusive shot of this event.

We can laugh at this photo and I have no real problem with the Weekly World News running such digitally created photos because of the context of where this photo is running. This is the second of the vocabulary words I want to give you: CONTEXT. Where the photo runs makes all the difference in the world. If this same photo ran on the front page of the New York Times, it would damage the credibility of the Times. In the context of the Weekly World News, it cannot damage their credibility because that newspaper does not have any credibility to begin with (it seems we need to create a new set of terms when we can refer to the weekly World News and the New York Times both as newspapers).

Context becomes a problem when we find digitally altered photos in reputable publications, and there have been many. For example, the cover of TexasMonthly once ran a photo of then Governor Ann Richards astride a Harley-Davidson Motorcycle. It came out that the only part of the photo that was Ann Richards was her head. The body on the motorcycle belonged to a model and the head of the governor was electronically attached to the model.

On the credit page in very small type, the editors claimed they explained what they had done and that this disclosure exonerated them.

They wrote:

    Cover Photograph by Jim Myers

    Styling by Karen Eubank

    Accessories courtesy of Rancho Loco, Dallas;

    boots courtesy of Boot Town, Dallas;

    motorcycle and leather jacket courtesy of Harley-Davidson, Dallas;

    Leather pants by Patricia Wolfe

    Stock photograph (head shot) By Kevin Vandivier / Texastock

In the first place this was buried on the bottom of a page very few people look at, in a type size few over 40 can read and was worded in a way as to be incomprehensible.

Secondly, my feeling is that no amount of captioning can forgive a visual lie. In the context of news, if a photo looks real, it better be real. This photo looked real but it was a fake. We have an obligation to history to leave behind us a collection of real photographs. This photo of Ann Richards entered into the public domain and on the day she lost her reelection bid, AP ran the photo on the wire for its clients. AP had to run a mandatory kill when they were informed it was not a real photo.

Written Lies

Janet Cooke was a reporter at the Washington Post who won a Pulitzer Prize in 1981 for a story she wrote about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy. The Prize was taken back and she was fired when it was discovered that she made up the story. Can you imagine if the Post put a disclaimer in italics at the end of the story when it first ran, that said something along these lines: "We know this exact kid does not exist but we also know this kind of thing does happen and so we created this one composite kid to personalize the story. Even though Jimmy does not exist you can believe everything else we wrote." The Post would have been the laughing stock of the industry and yet this is what TexasMonthly is doing by captioning away a visual lie. You have to have the same respect for the visual image as you have for the written word. You do not lie with words, nor should you lie with photographs.