Syria Massacre in Houla Condemned as Outrage Grows
This altered image should not be published because it spoils the meaning of the original photo. The original photo was taken 13 years ago and shows the child who jumps over the line of dead bodies. All those people were killed during the Saddam regime. The altered photo should not be published as one that depicts the bodies of children, which soon be buried.
Firstly, the newspaper cannot publish the unreliable images like this altered photo. Secondly, the main goal of the photo is to support the text, which is written in the newspaper. However, the altered image cannot support the text because it does not reflect what is actually written. Thirdly, when the newspaper publishes the altered photo, which does not show what is written, it loses the reputation, and people will not believe in its credibility.
Syria Massacre in Houla Condemned as Outrage Grows should not be published because it does not relate to the text. The publication of altered images is one of the biggest problems in journalism. Another big problem is that people lose faith in journalists. They don’t believe anymore in what they see. Nowadays, all the images are under the question, because it is very easy to change any image with the help of a computer. We cannot consider the photograph to be a fixed image anymore. The photographs became a mix of moveable pixels, which can be easily changed in order to deceive the reader. The main goal of journalists is to offer only one thing, and it is credibility. It is a very important thing and we must not forget about it. We must also remember that without credibility we are nothing, and we cannot exist as the profession without it (Long).
The credibility of journalism is spoiled every time the news organization is caught providing fake images to people. As the example, we can consider the case with the cover photo of O. J. Simpson. Time magazine took the photo of the criminal just when he was arrested, but they changed the photo before using it on the cover. Moreover, if the Newsweek had not published the same photo, the Time magazine wouldn’t have been caught. However, the two covers of both magazines were showed next to each other, which gave the opportunity to see that something is wrong. The matter was that Time magazine created a more sinister look of the picture in order to make the criminal look guilty (Long). We should repeat their mistakes if we want to save our credibility.
The issue of ethics should be also mentioned here. In order to provide the logical discussion of this issue, it is necessary to draw the distinction between two terms, which are ethics and taste. We can refer the term ethics to such issues as deception and lying. The term taste can be connected to the issues of blood, violence. Issues of taste can cause only few cancellations, but nobody will talk about it after a few days. The issues of ethics can cause more serious problems to the newspaper. Such issues destroy our credibility, and the effects of it can last for a very long time. We must take this fact into consideration, because it is impossible to get the lost credibility back (Long).
Another important thing, which must be mentioned, is the context of the photo. Words are used in order to provide the facts, but it is the photo, which can provide us with the real meaning of what is happening. That’s why our altered photo should not be published. It has the different context, which does not refer to the text. The issue of context can become a real problem when we see altered photos in publications, which have a great reputation. There were a lot of such cases. For instance, we consider Texas Monthly, which published the photo of Ann Richards astride the motorcycle. Later, it turned out that the photo was completely altered, because it was only the head of Ann Richards, which was depicted in the photo. The body belonged to another woman. Here, it must be stated that if the photo looks real, it better be real. The photo of Ann Richards looked real, but in reality it was the fake. We must also take into consideration the impact of the photo. The photo described above entered the public domain and it cost Ann Richards the reelection bid (Long).
New York Newsday also had the sad experience with the photo manipulation. It published the photo of two well-known ice skaters. Firstly, it was impossible to see something unusual on this photo. However, it turned out that this photo depicted the scene, which had not yet taken place. In order to understand the manipulation of New York Newsday, it is necessary to understand the ways, which give the opportunity to alter the photos. The photographers can change the angle in order to exclude the crowd of people. They can also use different filters, frame and crop. Such ways of photo manipulation are admissible only in the case of usage the photo for personal aims, but not for the publications. We must not permit such manipulation if we want to preserve the public faith in us (Stephens).
It is also necessary to discuss the issue of changes of content made to the photographs. The changes, which are made to photos, can be subdivided into two categories. The first category is the essential changes, which can change the whole meaning of the photo. The second one is accidental changes, which are used in order to remove the useless details, but not to change the true meaning. Of course, accidental changes are not of such importance as essential ones, but nevertheless they are still the changes. In order to provide a clear definition of the difference between these two categories, it is needed to provide appropriate examples. If to take a photograph of a groom and bride, and to remove one of them, this would be essential change because it would change the whole meaning of the photo. If to take the two photos of women standing on the beach, the original photo includes an accidental person behind them. Another photo does not include that person, because he was removed from it with the help of Photoshop. In this case, removing this person is considered to be the accidental change, because it does not change the original meaning of the photo. It may look like not the big deal, but people do not care whether it is a little lie or a big one. We don’t have the right to change the content of the photograph because it won’t be original anymore. Any change, which is made to news photo, is considered to be the lie. Moreover, it does not matter whether it is a big lie or little, it is the lie and that’s all. As it was discussed above, any lie damages our credibility. That’s why we cannot publish the altered images (Long).
It is needed to provide one more example in order to support the assertion. There were a lot of cases of photo manipulation over the past decades. Probably, the most famous of them is the case with pyramids cover, which was published by National Geographic. They have a horizontal photo of the pyramids and wanted to make a vertical cover. Of course, the photographer was not able to take such a photo, so they just put the photo in a computer and made that cover. As the result, they damaged their credibility in terms of ethics, but not in terms of tastes. The taste issues do not last for a long time, while the ethics issues do. Three decades passed since that time, but this case still enjoys a great popularity (Long). We mustn’t forget that the photography is the art and we should respect it (Sontag). It is impropriate to alter the photos, which are published. This example also shows why we should not publish the altered photo, because it may damage our credibility in terms of ethics.
It is necessary to remind that we are aiming firstly on the credibility of the photo. If this photo was changed, it cannot be published in our newspaper. It is very crucial to preserve the public faith in us as the journalists. We can see from different examples, which were provided above, that the manipulations with photos always end in a bad way. That’s why the altered photo Syria Massacre in Houla Condemned as Outrage Grows should not be published.
Works Cited
Long, John. "Ethics in the Age of Digital Photography." National Press Photographers Association. N.p., Sept. 1999. Web. 20 Jan. 2016.
Sontag, Susan. "On Photography." The Susan Sontag Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Jan. 2016.
Stephens, Mitchell. "Expanding The Language Of Photographs". Academics.smcvt.edu. N.p., 1997. Web. 20 Jan. 2016.
