The Ethics behind Photojournalism - Essay Example

The Ethics Behind Photojournalism In a time when digital cameras have finally reached a level of quality sufficient to begin replacing traditional film cameras in the field and the level of sophistication brought to digital image editing has surpassed anyone’s dreams, the question of ethics in determining whether or not to print a photograph in a major newspaper has taken on new meaning. Ethics, have, of course, been an important consideration since photographs first began appearing in newspapers in the 1850s, shortly after the invention of the camera in the late 1830s (Barber, 2006). However, the issue of determining appropriate ethical theory to apply to this widespread medium of communication has been difficult to define. “The production, presentation, and consumption of visual messages in all manner of media can be justifiably sliced in separate technological, historical, cultural and critical perspectives. The requirements for theory building at each stage are different” (Elliott & Lester, 2002). And while it is recognized that “Photography is the only ‘language’ understood in all parts of the world, and bridging all nations and cultures” (Helmut Gernsheim cited in Elliott & Lester, 2002), it is also acknowledged that “photographs supply information without having a language of their own. Photographs quote rather than translate from reality” (John Berger cited in Elliott & Lester, 2002). The difficulty arises from the variety of social, political and cultural approaches that can be taken in the interpretation of an image. Added to this is the greater ability of photographers and photojournalists to manipulate images in many different ways as a means of achieving the image sought. In determining the ethics involved in the decisions made by photojournalists and their editors regarding whether or not to print a particular image, then, it is necessary to take into consideration the “intent of the image creator and the not-so-blank canvas of the image consumer” (Elliott & Lester, 2002) as these various approaches come into play. There have been many ethical theories proposed to serve as guidelines for the photojournalist and others regarding what types of images to display or not to display. There are six main theories that can, and should, be applied to photojournalism. These include the categorical imperative, utilitarianism, hedonism, the golden mean, the golden rule and the veil of ignorance. Categorical imperative, suggested by Immanuel Kant, refers to doing the right thing regardless of any extenuating circumstances. “According to Kant, one does not question Categorical Imperatives as they are fundamental truths of the universe” (Richards, 2006). However, the right answer isn’t always clear, in which situation the principle of Unitarianism, proposed by John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, in which decisions should be made based on the idea of bringing the greatest good to the greatest number of people (Lee, 2000). Hedonism, the principle that humans seek only pleasure, is best applied to photography when the photojournalist or editor determines whether to print an image based solely on the aesthetic qualities it has to offer (Moore, 2004). Hedonism, as it is understood today, is tempered by Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean, which propounds that one must find the balance between extremes, working not for pleasure or pain, but to find the center where pleasure balances pain in equal measure (Ziniewicz, 1999). The Golden Rule is familiar to those who study the Bible and other religious writings as that principle of basing decisions upon “what you would have done unto you”, in other words, decisions made regarding images to be printed should be based upon the individual’s discretion regarding what they find desirable, helpful or educational while abstaining from printing anything they find objectionable (Gensler, n.d.). As a means of reducing the extreme effects of personal bias and prejudice, philosopher John Rawls “suggests that you imagine yourself in an original position behind a veil of ignorance. Behind this veil, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes” (Svenson, 2002). By keeping all six of these theories in mind, it is presumed that one would find it possible to appreciate the aesthetic, but seek a balance regarding the possible effects of printing an image as it is presented within a context as free of bias and prejudice as possible with the intent of bringing the greatest good to the greatest number of people without crossing the boundaries of what is considered right and just. Despite all this, the question of ethics is often confused with other photographic considerations, such as aesthetics or etiquette. “A question that is truly ethical deserves a response that addresses the human cost” (Elliott & Lester, 2002). The use of a particular image that is likely to cause a great deal of pain, for example, must be justified not on the concept of its beauty or interest level – an aesthetic concern – but rather on whether or not the display of this image is necessary to present the public with truths that, while they may be painful or unpleasant, will nevertheless serve to help right a tremendous wrong, such as the pictures taken at Abu Ghraib of American soldiers mistreating Iraqi prisoners. While aesthetics can be considered in the presentation of images, these images should not be altered or focused on the purely aesthetic qualities at the expense of pictorial misrepresentation, such as the following image published by the LA Times just after the beginning of the war on Iraq. (Photo presented in April, 2003, cited in Farid, n.d.) The photo inaccurately depicts a British soldier motioning to a frightened group of Iraqis to seek cover. The photographer, Brian Walski, later admitted to having combined two separate images in order to present an ‘improved’ composition (Farid, n.d.). Concerns regarding etiquette and ethics should revolve around the question of whether a particular image serves any specific ‘newsworthy’ purpose or is merely presented as a means of embarrassing the subject. “A journalist much be clear why a subject is selected, what tools are used and why, what words accompany the image and how that words and images are used” (Elliott & Lester, 2002). In order to do this, he or she must be aware of the social, political and cultural aspects involved in any image selected for publication. The ability of the photograph included in a news story to bring attention to what the journalist feels is the most important aspect to the story, thereby highlighting any social condition observed, also requires the photographer to take note of the prevailing social conditions. “Because images evoke almost immediate emotional responses among viewers, pictures have tremendous impact. With well-chosen words, visual messages combine to educate, entertain and persuade. But the flip side to such visual power is that images can also offend, shock, mislead, stereotype and confuse” (Lester, 1995). Thus, the social considerations of the photojournalist can be said to be defined in terms of responsibility. In determining whether to print a particular picture, the photojournalist must be aware of those issues that can potentially benefit or harm the society and base their decisions upon the benefits such display is likely to have. “The best reasons, ethically speaking, to show any news image is that it moves people to care and/or it helps people safely navigate through their daily lives. The greater potential harm caused by showing the photograph or videotape, the greater benefit it should also be” (Elliott & Lester, 2002). An example of this is the Western presentation of African societies as duotone villages of yellow and brown filled with starving people living in abject poverty. “The global media almost never depict contemporary Africans in ordinary situations; images of crisis frequently eclipse other representations” (Enwezor, 2005). Although there are populations in Africa that have all of the modern conveniences, and African society is filled with color, life and culture. It can be argued that this one-sided presentation is a gross misrepresentation of the true nature of the entire society because of its abject denial of any positive aspect to the country. It nevertheless serves to convey the conditions of poverty and hardship that a large majority of the population lives through, thereby encouraging Western populations viewing these images to take a greater humanitarian interest in assisting these nations overcome some of these issues. In addition, the limited space typically given to international coverage, especially in terms of African issues such as these, leaves few opportunities for photojournalists to highlight the attention these areas require. Thus, though there is a potential harm in not portraying the more widely based cultural richness of Africans, there is a perceived greater good in bringing the real problems of these peoples to the attention of those who might be in position to help. As can be seen though, the social responsibilities of the photojournalist can often run in competition with his or her cultural awareness. As in the previous example, those photojournalists who travel to Africa must take part in some of the celebrations held, must pass through the more prosperous areas of the continent and must see both the good and the bad inherent in all of the areas they visit. In choosing photos, he or she is aware of the cultural richness available and that this richness is not conveyed in the images selected. However, if this same photojournalist were making selections for a newspaper published in Africa, the images selected would most likely be much more culturally reflective (Enwezor, 2005). Throughout this process, though, the photojournalist must also be aware of the effects these decisions might have on helping to define these cultures. “In the late 1970s, the cultural importance of photojournalism began to be recognized by the art world, and photojournalists were given exhibitions and retrospectives at museums and galleries […] The photograph has affected the way many cultures throughout the world understand and learn about their world” (Westbrook, 2002). The images portrayed to a given public could have widespread repercussions that may or may not have been intended. Images of war helped bring home the horrors that were occurring on the battlefront while images of Africa help shape a view of a world of famine. In addition, the attitudes of the dominant culture could instill ideas that were not previously considered by the photographer. “Where stereotypes are at play, any picture can create a positive image or reinforce a negative one” (“Cultural Identity”, n.d.). In addition to considering how their photo might represent the culture of the subject, cultural ethics requires the photojournalist must also consider the predominant culture of the people who comprise the audience to determine whether that image would have the desired effect. The image also has a great degree of power in the political arena as images can be used to support or break down a government, help or hinder a campaign. The power of the photograph to sway the people one direction or another has been widely recognized since before photographs were invented. “During the English Reformation, Henry VIII’s advisor Thomas Cromwell led the effort to destroy religious images and icons in the country’s churches and monasteries, and was successful enough that few survive to this day” (Rosen, 2005). Other examples of leaders who would control the attitudes and beliefs of their peoples in more recent times include Russia’s Josef Stalin, who had his minions liberally apply airbrushing, cutting and pasting and other techniques to available images as a means of wiping out his competition, and Adolf Hitler, who refined the art of propaganda to gain German support for his ideas of world conquest and unique concepts of ethnic cleansing. Images used in America during the 2004 Presidential campaign were actually doctored using the computer program Photoshop. “A seventies-era image of Jane Fonda addressing an anti-war crowd with a young and raptly admiring John Kerry looking on was also created with Photoshop sorcery but circulated widely on the internet during the last presidential election as evidence of Kerry’s extreme views” (Rosen, 2005). (Photo presented in February 2004, cited in Farid, n.d.) The caption reads, “Actress and Anti-War Activist Jane Fonda Speaks to a crowd of Vietnam Veterans as Activist and former Vietnam Vet John Kerry (LEFT) listens and prepares to speak next concerning the war in Vietnam (AP Photo).” Presented in a believable newsprint style and with no indication of any tampering, the photo effectively convinces the viewer that Kerry was present at this meeting. While it was true that he supported the anti-war efforts, as a later undoctored photograph at another event demonstrated, was it ethical for this photojournalist to illustrate Kerry’s leanings with a false image? This and many other images just like it have continually raised the question of digital ethics in photojournalism, questioning when is it right to ‘tamper’ with a photo, such as touching up a person’s complexion, airbrushing out part of the background or fundamentally changing the image content. There are numerous examples of photographers being fired from their positions for changing the images they submit for publication. Popular Reuter’s photographer Adnan Hajj was caught using Photoshop to embellish images of the Israeli air-strike damage in Beirut, which resulted in his “firing and the removal of his 920 photographs from the Reuter’s archive” (Appel, 2006). In determining whether photos should be digitally altered in any way, instructor Bonnie Meltzer (1996) suggests questions many newspaper writers are already familiar with: where did the photo come from and is it the property of the photojournalist to make changes, when can the photo be used, why is it being changed, how will the public interpret the photo, what would they have interpreted if the photo had not been changed and what is the context in which the photo is to be used. A serious photojournalist will attempt to maintain accurate representation as free of bias, prejudice and alternate meanings as possible. The question of ethics in the real world can be traced through a look at some of Britain’s more prominent photojournalists, such as Tom Stoddart. Stoddart has provided images for many international magazines and newspapers, most frequently documenting “those moments in which unutterable misery meets human courage, strength, and compassion. His pictures rarely need explanation” (Hargreaves, 2004). For example, the following image taken in the Sudan. (Stoddart, 1998 cited in Hargreaves, 2004) In this image, the expression on the mother’s face can be interpreted any number of ways, but not necessarily that of a woman without hope, without courage or without pride. The creasing of her brows could be the effect of bright sunlight, concern for the child in her lap as well as the skeletal figure on the child behind her or anger that nothing more can be done for her and her family. Meanwhile, the bony figure standing behind her speaks eloquently of the starvation occurring that a living human could be so thin. “Stoddart’s photographs humanize what to many in the West are merely grim statistics clocking up a long way away. They portray innocent people, trapped by circumstances beyond their control, and serve as a timely reminder of the horrors of war, and the effects of mankind’s greed, intolerance, and prejudice” (Hargreaves, 2004). Stoddart’s images are shocking and disturbing, but are deemed to have a greater humanitarian good by reminding people in more prosperous regions of the innocent lives that are being affected by inaction and lack of concern. They remain culturally sensitive by retaining the pride and dignity of the people portrayed even as he illustrates the plight they are in and are presented in the hopes that they will politically activate those who might make a difference. Another British photojournalist who has demonstrated a high degree of ethics in choosing the images she presents to the world is Hazel Thompson. By using unusual angles in shooting her pictures, she is able to present an aesthetically arranged image that nevertheless serves to shock her audience by the deplorable conditions displayed. Her participation in a project entitled “Kids Behind Bars: We Must Act” produced the image below. (Thompson, 2006) This image portrays a God’s-eye view of children sleeping, which is normally associated, at least in Western culture, with the epitome of peace and innocence. However, these children are far from both as it can be seen by the bars in the foreground that they are jailed and the conditions in which they lie are anything but peace-inspiring. The children are crowded, poorly clothed and sleeping on mats at best, bare concrete at worst. While it was necessary for her to lie regarding her position as a means of getting these photographs, the photographs themselves were not altered significantly from the shots Thompson took at the prison in the Philippines and the images selected were considered to be representative of children’s prisons in many parts of the world (Thompson, 2006). Like Stoddart, Thompson’s choice in images helps to underscore the importance of the work, the innocence of children juxtaposed against the hard fact of the bars, the young bodies sprawled in sleep as much as possible shown against the close confines of the jail cell. With images such as these, she hopes to call attention to those who could make changes as well as gain social support for reform. While there remain many ways in which images can be used, abused, altered or presented, the ethics of photojournalism focus upon the main concepts of truth in reporting and presenting the facts. If images are to be believed, if the publication is to be believed, digital altering of images to be used should remain at the least possible interference with any ‘tampering’ to be done only in the interest of clarifying the image’s statement without taking it out of context, disturbing the fundamental shot or allowing any misleading information. In addition to ensuring the images used accurately portray the situation, it is important that a photojournalist be concerned not only with the culture and society being portrayed, but also the culture and society of the audience and how this portrayal might affect perceptions on either side. Although disturbing photographs must and will always be displayed as long as there remains war, famine and injustice in the world, the presentation of these images must be based upon the principles of goodness and right, ambiguous enough statements but inherently present within any given culture. References Appel, Brian. (2006). “Contemporary Photography: Truth and the Burden of Reality.” Photo Central. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from < http://www.iphotocentral.com/collecting/article_view.php/16/20/1> Barber, Phil. (1 January, 2006). “A Brief History of Newspapers.” Historic Pages. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from < http://www.historicpages.com/nprhist.htm> “Cultural Identity.” (n.d.). American Photography: A Century of Images. PBS. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Elliott, Deni & Lester, Paul Martin. (2002). Visual Communication and an Ethic for Images. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Enwezor, Okwui. (2005). “Snap Judgments: New Positions in Contemporary African Society.” The Museum at the International Center of Photography. Accesssed 5 December, 2006 from Farid, Hany. (n.d.). “Digital Tampering in the Media, Politics and Law.” Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Gensler, Henri. (n.d.). “The Golden Rule.” Gensler’s Home Page. Accessed 5 December, 2006 < http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/gensler/goldrule.htm> Hargreaves, Sarah. (3 July, 2004). “Witness: A Retrospective Photographic Exhibition by Tom Stoddart.” BMJ. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Lee, Eugene. (6 November, 2000). “An Introduction to Utilitarianism.” The Victorian Web. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Lester, Paul Martin. (1995). “Photojournalism Ethics Timeless Issues.” Readings in Mass Communication. Michael Emery & Ted Curtis Smythe (Eds.). Guilford, CT: Brown & Benchmark Publishers. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Meltzer, Bonnie. (December 1995/January 1996). “Digital Photography: A Question of Ethics.” Leading and Learning with Technology. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from < http://fno.org/may97/digital.html> Moore, Andrew. (20 April, 2004). “Hedonism.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Richards, Stephen A. (2006). “Immanuel Kant and the Categorical Imperative.” Faithnet. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Rosen, Christine. (Fall 2005). “The Image Culture.” The New Atlantis. N. 10, pp. 27-46. Accessed 5 December 2006 from Svenson, Ernest. (18 July, 2002). “The Veil of Ignorance.” Accessed 5 December 2006 from Thompson, Hazel. (July 2006). “Kids Behind Bars.” The Digital Journalist. Accessed 5 December 2006 from < http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0607/kids-behind-bars.html> Westbrook, Dillon. (2002). “A Brief History of Photojournalism.” Photography Schools. Accessed 5 December, 2006 from Ziniewicz, Gordon. (1999). “Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics Moral Virtues and the Mean.” Doctor Z’s Philosophy Page. Accessed 5 December, 2006 < http://www.fred.net/tzaka/arismean.html> Read More