Digital Manipulation J3: 2003

Coming up Ethics and Debate Summary of Literature Survey Technology Grocott’s Capacity, Other Policies and Examples Industry Opinions Recommendations for Grocott’s

Ethics and Debate Ways of viewing photography: Constructivist vs Realist Pros and cons of digital manipulation Interpretation vs Reflection Cooper: “journalists are becoming their own gatekeepers”

Summary of Literature Survey Physical manifestation of ‘a truth’; perceived as reality Digital manipulation threatens representation of truth Monty Cooper “manipulated photographs are indistinguishable from reality”

Literature Survey cont. Ethical and moral obligations of photojournalists Loss of credibility and loss of readers trust = bad for sales Political persuasion?

Technology Pros: –Cheaper than film once implemented –Easier and faster –More accessible Cons: –Easy to abuse –Can distort meaning

Grocott’s Capacity, Other Policies and Examples Grocott’s: –Limited resources Die Burger, The Argus, Mail& Guardian, American Publications

Example =

Example 2

Industry Opinions Die Burger: –“unnecessary to manipulate a scene to represent truth” –“it’s only acceptable if clear to the reader that it’s been done” –“cropping and colour adjustments are allowed only as far as it enhances the story of the photo”

Industry opinions cont. Trevor Crighton - “wrong for news” - “different for advertising and magazines” - “once start, can’t stop”

Industry opinions cont. Steven Penny (Grocott’s) - does crop, alter light, and has spliced photos Mike Lowe (ECN) - reporters take photos; not trained photojournalists

Recommendations for Grocott’s Must not change content and meaning of photos. Therefore: – No manipulation allowed unless with unanimous consent from ‘photography panel’ and then with details of adjustments in caption – ‘photography panel’ established from members of Grocott’s editorial team. –Subjects of photographs should be notified of any alterations.