As I have said before I feel like photojournalism is a way to communicate news to the world. The news whether it is spoken, written, or photographed is supposed to be an honest portrayal of the world, when photojournalistic photographs are altered it alters the truth this is not ethical or acceptable when it comes to the press. No matter the subject of the photography there should be no glorified or sugar coded alterations to the photographs. Journalism is about real life subject matter and the public wants to see real life being portrayed in the press, and the public deserve to have that right. If a photojournalist alters their photographs they loose their credibility as a photojournalist and I feel they do not deserve the title of a photojournalist. Another argument against photo alteration is that a lot of the time photographs go along with a piece of written press in a news article. Integrity is extremely important when it comes to the press and serious issues, when a piece of work and a photograph are put together the message is even stronger then when they are separate. If the message is portrayed incorrectly it can have a huge impact on the public. Photojournalism has a big impact on the viewers mental image and opinion of what happened in whatever the subject matter may be. When a journalistic photograph is altered it could become a completely different message then what it was intended to be in the first place.
Here are some passages I felt were helpful during my research.
Part of the digital camera’s popularity can be explained by an increased command over the outcome of pictures now that electronic processes allow for greater manipulability, and yet the flipside is that pictures can also be easily manipulated by anyone who has access to the appropriate toolbox. A similar paradox can be noticed in regard to the distribution of personal pictures. While the internet allows for quick and easy sharing of private snapshots, that same tool also renders them vulnerable to unauthorized distribution.
Photography always also served as an instrument of communication and as a means of sharing experience. As Susan Sontag argued in 1973, the tourist’s compulsion to take snapshots of foreign places reveals how taking pictures can become paramount to experiencing an event; at the same time, communicating experiences with the help of photographs is an integral part of tourist photography.
Source:
Digital photography: communication, identity, memory by Jose Van Dijck
Here are some examples of altered press photography.
It was August 1989, TV Guide published the above image of Oprah Winfrey featured as queen of daytime TV talk shows on its cover. The doctored photo composites an image of Oprah's head with Ann Margret's body.
MacDailyNews argued that evidence suggested TIME Magazine purposefully distorted the aspect ratio of a Getty image. The intent was to create the physical appearance of Job's illness to match the copy.
The TIME Magazine article, "Why is Steve Jobs skipping MacWorld?" stated, "Jobs has battled pancreatic cancer and has been looking exceptionally thin since the summer." MacDailyNews said that the Getty photo TIME Magazine selected to depict was purposefully squeezed in the XY axis in order to make him appear thinner (and sicker), than in reality.
"An image of Katie Couric, originally released in May by CBS, was slimmed down for reuse..."
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment