Photojournalism Ethics.

For my Social class, I have to answer whether it’s ok to change this photo, removing a black blemish on a white flower:

Looking at a photo of a white flower with a little black speck on it, it would be easy, and usually understandable, to remove the blemish. Many artistic photographers won’t even consider releasing a photo without re-touching it.
When we’re talking about journalism, we need to remember that the impact of the photo comes from the belief that the camera “never lies”, and that as a bit of machinery, simply records a moment in time, as the photographer saw it.
There are some editing processes that are allowed in news images, though. Some of these include cropping photos, lightning or darkening the image, or (legally advised) concealment of a person’s identity. It seems that as long as the original context of the even is not tampered, permission is allowed, and it’s probably just up to the editors decision.

It’s a subject that could be argued back and forth for weeks, but if we’re sticking with the flower, in my opinion, it shouldn’t be ok to remove the black dot. The reason?

Well, I know, it’s just a flower, and if it’s only a personal shot – a photo taken on holiday, maybe – no-one would blink if you removed it to make the image better, if you wanted to frame it or something. In that case it would be ok.
If it’s an artistic photo, which looks like it could end up in Ikea or Jysk (like this one), then that black dot could decide whether the buyers could buy it, or go and look at someone else’s portfolio. All on the basis of that little black smudge.
Now, I wouldn’t really call myself conservative, but I wouldn’t want to see someone go hungry just because they had enough morals not to wipe out a small black dot.
If the photo was some sort of scientific discovery, then it wouldn’t be ok to change it, leave it as it was found.

However, if it was going to appear in a magazine or some life section of a newspaper, then it wouldn’t be ok to change it. It’s the same as anything else that goes into a newspaper that is trying to get the truth out to the public. It wouldn’t be acceptable for a reporter to tamper or fabricate with quotes, therefore it shouldn’t be acceptable for a photographer to tamper with their shots.
In journalistic photos, it shouldn’t matter what is in the background or in shot by accident, it’s what was there at the time. Personally I think that cropping photos is going too far – what could have been cropped out of the shot? A person? A homemade sign or banner? All of this matters, it was there for a reason.

So to sum it up, in any form of journalism related aspect, it would be wrong to change anything. In anything else, it’s probably ok, it’s understandable. But personally, I still wouldn’t do it.

last song i heard – “Do You Get High” – Holly McNarland