Ethics - Photojournalism

We’ve been looking at an article from The New York Times which was published on February 17th 2015. It’s based on the rules and ethics within photojournalism including photo manipulation which often causes a stir. The purpose of the article is to discuss the problems which occurred after the World Press Photo contest 2015. Out of all the people who took part and submitted entries into the competition, 20% were disqualified for so-called ‘over manipulating’ (this included adding things into the images, taking things away and toning). The amount of disqualifications was 3 times more than in last year’s competition. The article has sections in which are written/from the contest jury and photographers. They all have different opinions on the matter of altering photojournalism entries.

One of the spiels in the article is from an unnamed photographer who doesn’t seem to agree with the contest for disqualifying over manipulation. He starts his spiel with ‘Contests are necessary evil.’ This short sentence immediately gives you the impression of him not agreeing with the way in which they work. This photographer goes on quite a lot about how photographers are misled by contests and are not appreciated for the work they’re doing. He stands up for what freelance photography needs in order to get out there – ‘Freelancers needs contests for visibility and marketing’ – this is a very valid point as many people use things like this as a way of getting their own personal style of work out there so surely they should put their spin on it whether it includes much post production or not. His choice of language makes me think he is quite angry and feels passionate about the situation. He states how unclear the rules are for photographers wanting to take part, ‘the rules have blurred’ this to me is true as even though it might say something in the ‘terms and conditions’ within the competition ruling, certain terms are different in our minds. A good example of this is ‘over-manipulation’, to some people this might mean simply airbrushing a person’s skin who was walking down the street but to others it would only be ‘over’ the normal amount of post-production if the person was morphed into a new figure, airbrushed, a new colour hair etc. In the industry and just in general life, we all see different limits on everything we do. To back up his statement, this photographer asked a question to the reader, ‘why is it O.K. to use flash and basically bring a portable sun?’ this is making you think about other things which could be thought of as manipulating the photographs you’re taking. Obviously using a portable light changes a photo quite dramatically so it could be used as an argument against post-production rulings.

Another photographer who talks in this article has a complete opposite opinion on the matter. This probably has something to do with the fact that she works for The New York Times who are bias towards to competition jury. She quite eagerly stresses that manipulating photojournalism work isn’t right and shouldn’t be done ‘The fact that some photojournalists thing any degree of lying and manipulation is O.K., makes me question the message they’re sending to others…’ This is a very forceful statement on the side of the work being wrong when edited a lot. The only thing being is that this photographer is also a journalist for the paper. She seems to be sticking with the competition rules and believes herself that you shouldn't manipulate photographs which are 'journalism'.

I have a bit of a mixed view on the subject of manipulating photos in general but when it comes to photojournalism, it's more of a bold conclusion. If photographs are being taken for journalism purposes I don't think you should be allowed to edit them as it can give off false statements. Stuff like changing exposure in programs like Photoshop is a bit different as it might be a dull photograph with amazing composition and sharpness so therefore knocking the exposure up it would be an ideal picture. I think any post-production in photojournalism has to be subtle and with valid reasoning, other than that it isn't giving readers/viewers a clear image.

As a rule everyone has slightly different views on manipulating photos whether it be for fashion purposes or landscape purposes. It's something we should come to a decision on but are unable to due to the diversity within opinions and peoples views - both moral and ethical.