Blog Exercise 5: Ethics

What are the ways readers can judge the credibility of an image even in this era of digital manipulation?

Readers should be aware that things might not be what it is even in photographs. There are many photograph manipulation softwares and a lot of other factors have to be taken into consideration before ou assume something.

One way from which the credibility can be determined could be from the source of the picture. If the picture is taken from a random photographer which might have manipulated the photograph for his own benefit, then the photograph should not be trusted. But if the photograph is from a reputable news photographer or a photojournalist, it is highly possible that the photograph is real. If there is a watermark or and icon of the news station from which the photograph is taken from, it will increase the credibility of the photograph.

The other way could be cross referring the information on the photograph with that of other sources. If the photograph is the only source of information, it might not be 100% correct and thus this information should not be taken as the truth even if the source is credible.

Basically, in this age of digital manipulation, photographs should all be taken 'with a pinch of salt'. No truth should be taken with only the picture as the only source or evidence.

Imagine yourself as a reader representative for a newspaper. What would you tell a reader who complained to you about a picture of a car wreck that was particularly upsetting?

I would politely write a letter of explanation on the photojournalist's ethical role in bringing forth what exactly has happen. Of course, through processes like cropping and choosing another angle to take the pictures, the picture of the car wreck might not convey the loss and seriousness of the accident as well. Should we water down the news just because the viewers do not want to see it?

I would tell the reader how important it was for us to take a good picture of the wreck to convey the gruesomeness of the accident. If the photograph cause the reader to be upset, it is just intended because accidents like this are supposed to make the readers upset over the wreck. I would then quote the example of what if all the car wrecks or accidents that involve blood were all self censored to not show any disturbing images, no one will ever know how serious traffic accidents are until they witness one for themselves. Wouldn't that be too late?

Photographs in the news have to portray what it would feel like to be there at the event himself. If the readers do not want to look at such images, they would then have to ignore such pictures because for the sake of the general public and to be an ethical photojournalist, the raw truth have to be reflected in the photographs.