Digitally Editing Photos
Manipulation of photos for journalism, propaganda, or any other source attempting to be credible is something that should defiantly be watched for closely. These can distort the truth and mislead viewers to accept claims that may not exist at all. Kittross notes that manipulation of images has been around for centuries, but with the digital age it has become much easier to “professionally” edit photos invisibly.
One example of the dark side of editing photos comes in June 1994 when Time’s put their front cover as OJ Simpson during his trial. The Time’s edited the photo to appear much darker then it originally was to create a specific “mood” to convey to the audience. This is one of the most unethical things a magazine could do. This will create an image in the mind of the people, that OJ is guilty, no matter what the facts of the case are. Who are the editors at the Time’s to decide if he is guilty? Other things such as replacing people with other people, or slimming down public figures to make them more acceptable to the public are equally unethical. It all distorts the facts. One example that we discussed in class was the case of the photo of Beirut, Lebanon after a Israeli bombing. The photo was edited to create more smoke and damage then there really was, and a news organization found the picture and published it. It is important that we are vigilant in the search of fake and false photos because if the public and news organizations aren’t watching out for this there can be a repeat of this very incident. To me, it would be important to establish your credibility as a photojournalist with a code of ethics. Manipulation of digital content in the entertainment world, is a little different because there is not any attempt at conveying the truth to the audience, unless stated otherwise.
