Universiteit van Amsterdam Department of Philosophy
Ethics in Photojournalism:
1. Introduction
2. Crash Course on Photojournalism 2.1. Objectivity Claim
2.2. Photojournalism and Ethics 3. The Problems:
3.1. Photo Manipulation
3.2. Aestheticization of Human Suffering 3.3. Dilemma of Acute Aid
3.4. Publishing Graphic Photographs 4. Conclusion
Introduction
“Photojournalism has no Bible, no rabbinical college, no Pope to define correct choices.”
Kenneth Kobre (2008)
Every professional photojournalist is sooner or later going to face the duties and responsibilities imposed by their profession. Some of them are part of the daily routine: researching a story, arriving at the scene, capturing important information on camera. During this very technical and practical process, underlying and complex issues might occur.
“Photojournalism as a profession imposes a set of responsibilities. [...] Beneath [the] functional tasks lie broader ethical considerations. Confronting these issues is often more challenging than the assignment itself.” 1
To introduce the topic, it might be useful to learn about the main goals of photojournalists’, before continuing with detecting and discussing the ethical problems they might encounter along the way.
The profession of photojournalists’ brings along the mission of achieving certain goals through executing their work. Researching various blogs of and interviews with professional photojournalists two main concerns become evident: with their photos they do not only want to inform, but also appeal for empathy and finally involvement. 2
At last their profession is supposed to be understood as the responsibility of capturing and reporting on events in society and saving these images by reason of human history. All the examples of photographs used in this paper will be of such kind, which succeeded in this proposition and changed not only the way of human thinking but also stand as milestones in human history.
1Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
2008, p. 353
In comparison to common journalism, photojournalism has one big advantage. Sociologist and photographer Lewis Wickes Hine said: “If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn’t need to lug around the camera.” Communicating news, events and stories in the form of photos is3 an effective way of attracting people’s attention immediately.
Photos emotionalise by touching, surprising and shocking the viewers more than it could ever be possible with a written text. Above all the use of photos makes it possible to summarize the story of the situation and to get its essence to the point in one single frame. Therefore they do not only underline written news stories but they are able to tell the whole story all by themselves. Considering this, it is important to note that each and every photojournalistic product should have the capability of explaining itself, even though in reality it is helpful to explain the context in words to avoid misinterpretations and -understandings.
Why should it be important to deliberate ethical issues regarding the goals of photojournalists? In 1989 the TIMES magazine published a special edition on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the invention of photography. Within the pages of the magazine the ten greatest images (of that time) witnessing important moments in human history were printed. Remarkably, eight of those ten photographs were related to ethical problems, either with the content or the photographer and the photographic process. Some of them concerned the field of photo manipulation: moving of bodies, to illustrate the American civil war in one case or staging the whole scene for the perfect photograph in another. Some of them were of a more interpersonal nature, for example when a photographer decided not to pay the photographed people, who posed for the picture. 4
This specific assortment of the ten greatest images, which the editors behind TIME magazine picked, raises the suspicion that a majority of famous, documentary photographs might have an ethically problematic background of some sort.
In this paper some important questions concerning the ethics of photojournalism are going to be discussed. These cover a diverse field of topics such as how the photographer should behave while taking the picture, which objects are appropriate to capture and which aren’t and how far he or she can go to manipulate the picture before and after taking it.
3Lewis Wickes Hine in Andrea Scala, About Photography
, 2012, p.67
4Paul Martin Lester, Photojournalism: An Ethical Approach
Since the very first processing of a photograph in 1839 people use cameras (or smartphones 5 in this day and age) to capture every existing object around them for eternity. The use of photographs for documentary and journalistic purposes followed as a natural consequence.
Since then this specific form of reporting has spread its branches in all imaginable ranges: news reporting, sports photography, nature and wildlife photography, just to name a few of the many subdivisions.
The aim of this paper is to focus on photographs used in news reporting, more specifically on spot news, that depict human suffering: pictures that show crimes, accidents, disasters, people in wars, in a political or social crisis, starving, injured, dying or dead people.
Considering these themes our intuition might instantly bring up some interesting and problematic questions, like: Is it okay to photograph a dying person or even a dead body? Can I disrupt people grieving and interfere the scene by taking pictures? Shall I help the dying person or take a photo?
In the course of completing their tasks photojournalists might be forced to choose between following their naturally given behaviour as a human individual and the guidelines for professional photojournalists.
This dilemma of individual choice versus professional responsibility is also visible in other professions. The lawyer, who defends a known and guilty murderer, has to follow the legal code of the particular nation, which maybe goes against his own moral attitude.
One of those principles for photojournalists concerns the question about objectivity of the standpoint of the photographer and the resulting photograph.
Right in the beginning of the history of photojournalism one of the main concerns was to represent the environment as truthfully as possible. Today this is still a major goal. In the first chapter of this paper I’m going to ask the question: What is photographic objectivity and does it exist?, whilst referring to some general facts, like the intentions and goals, about the profession of the photojournalist to set a solid ground of basic knowledge for the following discussion on the relevant problems.
5Susan Sontag, On Photography
The presumably most important association for photojournalists all around the globe is the NPPA (National Press Photographers Association). In 1947 the members of this association put together a set of ethical guidelines for photojournalists worldwide for the first time. 6
After gaining some clarity on the objectivity claim it is time to introduce the Code of Ethics, in which the NPPA tries to collect and set rules and goals for photojournalists. By having a closer look at some of these rules and scrutinizing these examples, some derivative questions might rise up, that highlight some of the discrepancies in the realisation of the rules and even the code itself.
In the main part of the thesis exactly those ambiguities and dilemmas, every photojournalist might face one day, are going to be discussed. One of the more apparent problems concerns the widely spread issue of photo manipulation. There are many different ways of manipulating a photograph. Sometimes it happens prior to the actual shot, by staging the scene or even a whole story, sometimes it happens after, by editing the picture up to absolute falsification.
The second issue to be brought up poses the question of acute assistance, for example in the case of an attack in a war. As a war journalist it is your duty to observe and report every important event. As a human being you might feel empathy and sense the urgency to help.
After that there will be a look at examples of photographs, that are aesthetically stimulant and perfect to such an extent that the content might fall into oblivion. The question here concerns the moral responsibility of the photojournalist and his understanding of the line between news reporting and creating an artwork.
The last point in this paper is going to touch on another interesting point of view, namely on the decision making process and the aftermath of publishing a photo, which is disputable in its brutal and graphic content. This point will be rounded off with Susan Sontag’s opinion on the extreme exposure related to the display of brutality, suffering and death. In several essays she expresses her thoughts against the ongoing propagation of human suffering. How should a photojournalist react to this complete opposite perspective?
Whenever specific examples will be brought up, I’m going to repeatedly look at two commonly known approaches of applied ethics, suggested by Kenneth Kobre in his book on photojournalism as an orientation for aspiring photojournalists: utilitarianism and absolutism.
Overall the goal of writing this paper is to look at a topic, that has been discussed and challenged from different perspectives many times before, and to show, that in spite of all the obstacles (or maybe even because of them) photography in news reporting on human suffering plays an important role for the capacity of human remembering and therefore for the course of history of humankind.
At the end of these introductory words I want to point out that the ideas written down in this paper shall not only call for the attention of professionals but also of each and every person. With the revolution of the internet and smartphones, in a time, in which a vast amount of the western population is continuously connected with millions of other people, sharing their thoughts, photos and videos, the problems discussed in this paper might not only concern professional photojournalists, but everyone who is able to press the camera button on their phone.
Crash Course on Photojournalism Objectivity Claim
To begin with it seems important to foreclose one complex question about photography and photojournalism and get it out of the way. What does objectivity in regards of photography mean? Even though this question might not necessarily concern the ethicists among the readers, the claim for photographic and professional distance is the basis of photojournalism and plays a role in any of the issues discussed later on.
Since the first photographs have been taken on behalf of journalistic purposes, the objectivity claim has been hanging in the air. One of the main tasks for a photojournalist is to “tell the truth”. This seems intuitively obvious. We want to be able to rely on the news and7 the photographs and videos we find in the papers, online or broadcasted by news channels on TV to be truthful and unbiased.
7Dona Schwartz, To Tell the Truth: Codes of Objectivity in Photojournalism
, in James W. Carey (ed.),
Communication Vol. 13,
To what extent can this be expected? To approximate this relatively vague phrase of “telling the truth”, it might help to first look at the term “objectivity” from a different point of view.
When talking about objectivity, many people might say that it doesn’t even exist at all. From a mathematical perspective, this is false, because of the fact that there is a clear, undeniable and objective truth in the natural sciences, like mathematics and physics.
In this paper the term “objectivity” refers to our own, individual perception. It is about a relationship between a perceiving subject, which is usually a human being, and a perceived or unperceived object, which can exist, without the need of being noticed by a subject, which means that the object would be there even if there was no subject around to perceive it.
So in this case it is maybe necessary to look for a different idea and term, like intersubjectivity. This term is used to describe a relationship between human beings on a psychological level. It is about putting people, with a certain content of mind and beliefs into communities and about differentiating the groups depending on their perspectives. Being part of a thought community with other people, who made similar experiences and therefore have similar beliefs, helps us to excel our own individual subjectivity.
Regarding photography this could mean, that agreement of many people on the truth of the photograph could substitute pure objectivity. The problem with this becomes evident. The disagreement between two individuals is now translated into a wider frame: disagreement between groups of individuals. Who could say, which group is right? It probably would be wrong to assume that one group of people is right, only because it counts a higher number of members than the other one. Even though intersubjectivity can’t replace objectivity, it certainly helps establishing it by transcending individual subjectivity. There 8 are not only disparities in perception between individuals but even with ourselves.
In a parable, brought up by John Locke, we learn about the simplest divergence between a subjective judgment and an objective reality: If you hold one hand in ice water and the other hand in hot water for a few seconds and place both hands in a bucket of lukewarm water, you experience competing subjective experiences of exactly the same objective reality. While the hand, that was in the cold water before, feels warm now, the hand, that was in the hot water before, feels cold.
8Dwayne H. Mulder, Objectivity
Therefore it is possible for one perceiving subject to simultaneously perceive completely differing impressions of the same, single object. One conclusion one might draw of this experiment might be that two different perceiving minds could also have differing impressions of the same, single object. Two people put their hands into the bucket of water and one describes it was cold, the other one describes it as hot. 9
This example is supposed to make clear, that even if everybody lives together in the same objective reality, the perception of this reality can differ up to extreme opposites not only between different individuals, but also within our very own experience of the world. The outcome depends on the context as much as the individual’s background and conditions. This model of the perceiving subject and the objectively existent reality can also be applied to photography.
The photographer as a human being finds herself in an objective and real situation and perceives it with her subjective mind. In her role as a photographer it is her goal to communicate the situation with other individuals. She uses the camera as a tool, as a visual extension of her perceiving mind to capture and materialise her perception of reality in the form of a photograph.
By doing this and publishing the photo afterwards, the photographer tells a story of the experienced situation. Similar to all the hundreds of stories we hear everyday from our friends and family, people we meet, reading magazines and books, watching TV, listening to the radio and reading the news, each and every one of them is influenced by its narrator.
Different factors play an important role for the narration of every kind of story, like the narrator’s perspective on the situation, which again is influenced by the personal background of the narrator and also by the attitude and background knowledge the narrator brings into the situation. When telling the story the way, in which the narrator decides to, the following is relevant: the words, she uses, the order, she chooses to tell the events, the choice of details, she wants to highlight or ignore, the wider context, she wants to classify her story into.Telling a story by taking and using photographs follows the same criteria, but at the same time it is different to any other type of story telling.
9 Example by John Locke found in: Dwayne H. Mulder, Objectivity
, 〈http://www.iep.utm.edu/objectiv/〉, last
Usually it is the photographer’s goal to represent the situation in one single frame, which is a challenge by itself. In the best case the expression “a picture is worth a thousand words” becomes true. The tools, the photographer uses to tell her story, therefore have to be different to using words and sentences.
As soon as she found the object, she wants to capture, she has to think about technical factors, like the lense, the angle and position of the camera, the effect and mood of light and the framing of the object. As a documentary photographer and photojournalist you are usually not allowed to influence the real scene in any way - there is going to be more talk about this in the point on photo manipulation - in opposition to being an artistic photographer, who has the freedom to stage the scene after her own personal taste.
After the actual process of shooting the photo, there are endless options of editing the picture to achieve the desired effect, like zooming in, cropping the picture, changing the colours and so on, but photojournalists are in most cases very limited in this.
Using the technical tools is not the only impact a photographer has on the photo. As mentioned before, the individual attitude the narrator - in this case the photographer - brings along, changes a lot about the final outcome of the story.
One example for this is an experiment called DECOY executed by Canon Australia in 2015. Six different photographers were supposed to take the picture of the same man, but every single one of them was told a different story about the model’s background: millionaire, life-saver, alcoholic, ex-convict, psychic and fisherman. The photographers portrayed him in a way they thought would show his (fictitious) character traits the best. Even though all photos were shot in the same studio and with access to the same props, the result were six completely different photographs of the same man, following from six different, subjective perspectives. The conclusion of the experiment was that “a photograph is shaped more by the person behind the camera than by what is in front of it.” 10
I want to conclude these thoughts by stating that the demand for “telling the truth” is more complex as it might seem in the beginning. Objectivity regarding human perception is an utopian claim - this is valid for daily interactions in human life as for photojournalism. Photographies are never a perfect copy of reality, but one of an endless number of interpretations.
10〈https://fstoppers.com/portraits/six-photographers-shoot-same-subject-see-different-person-96891〉, last
As the professor for political and social philosophy Bert van den Brink expresses in one of his lectures on photojournalism, the photograph is nothing more but a surface and the viewer has to think or feel what is more and how reality has to be, if the photograph looks likethis
.
Every photograph, that can’t explain itself leaves open a wide spectrum of deduction, speculation and fantasy. The parts of a photograph, that are not theoretically explained, create its attraction and provocation. 11
The question now is, if there is not objectivity does that mean that the photograph is nothing more but the perspective of the photographer? American photographer and writer Dona Schwartz argues against this. She says that every photograph, especially documentary photography, carries a message and therefore represents more than personal self-expression. 12 I want to conclude this point by quoting journalist Dan Gillmor, who claims that the term “objectivity” in photojournalism should be replaced:
“[T]he idea of objectivity is a worthy one. But we are human. We have biases and backgrounds and a variety of conflicts that we bring to our jobs every day. I’d like to toss out objectivity as a goal, however, and replace it with four other notions that may add up to the same thing. They are pillars of good journalism: thoroughness, accuracy, fairness and transparency” 13
A photo doesn’t represent reality completely and there is always a context behind the picture, that we initially cannot see. It is the intention of each photographer to tell a story by taking a good photo and to cause emotional response by involving the viewer. At the same time the photo should look as natural as possible. While the photographer as the storyteller manipulates and mediates the image to a certain extent to tell a good story and affect the viewer, he has to go after the truth in a sense, that he wants to provide the reader with accurate facts about the context of the situation.
11Bert van den Brink, Lecture on Photojournalism
,
〈http://www.fernuni-hagen.de/videostreaming/ksw/forum/20140213.shtml〉, last access 03.10.2016
12Dona Schwartz, “To Tell the Truth: Codes of Objectivity in Photojournalism”, 1992, in: James W. Carey, Communication Vol. 13,
1992, pp. 95-111
13Dan Gillmor, The End of Objectivity,
2005, in: Minla Linn Shields, Ethics in Photojournalism: Authenticity
and Sensitivity in Coverage of Tragic Events
Photojournalism and Ethics
It is anything but easy to assess the specific relationship between photojournalism and ethics and it would take an endless amount of pages and time to get anywhere near an acceptable definition. Fact is that men and women who work in photojournalism today (or any other editorial profession) should have to follow a specific ethical framework. One of the most prevalent codes is the set of rules put together by the NPPA (National Press Photographers Association). On the basis of this code photographers are able to orientate themselves when facing complex or indistinct situations.
First of all it is important to mention that freedom of press as well as any ethical perspective on photojournalism depends both on the specific country and time. Over the course of the last 150 years the view on the ethics of photojournalism has changed many times and is still in a constant process of evolving. During the Vietnam War in the 1960s, just to name one prominent example, one of the main concerns was the question of getting involved. At this point in time there were barely any rules or guidelines for photographers on how or whether to assist people in situations of war or crisis. I’m going to say more about 14 this issue in the point on the dilemma of acute aid.
Another major changing point in the history of photojournalism was the rise of digital technology in 1992, like digital cameras and editing programs like photoshop. With this innovation another problem stood in the center of attention: By now a lot of different rules depending on the certain country, association or even news magazine exist.
In this paper the focus is going to be exclusively put on the American perspective (which has a great influence on the European standpoint) and the Code of Ethics provided by the NPPA. There are many more interesting, ethical guidelines for photojournalists, that could be taken under consideration, but sometimes the rules of the numerous codes differ merely in specific details and the extent of this thesis is limited.
What might help for the understanding is the simple differentiation between two categories: the ethical guidelines given by the editor, the magazine or the news channel and the ethics that focus on the photographer as an individual.
14Daniel R. Bersak, Ethics in Photojournalism: Past, Present and Future,
Rules that are set and enforced by the authorities of a newspaper or magazine can be understood as institutional. If a magazine for example heavily emphasizes the autonomy of the photographer and doesn’t allow to interfere in a documentary scene at all, like a demonstration, - in advance or afterwards - then this falls under the institutional ethics. The second category includes all the choices a photographer as an individual makes herself, like the decision of helping victims in a war or taking photos of them.
Out of the four issues, that will be mentioned and discussed in this paper, the points on photo manipulation, aestheticization and extreme exposure would probably count as institutional problems, while the dilemma of acute aid rather concerns the photographer as an individual. Even though this separation helps the understanding of the relationship between ethics and photojournalism on a theoretical level, it is not dogmatic. There are always going to be exceptions and overlaps.
The man or woman, who struggles with taking pictures of a brutally graphic scene of victims of a car crash might receive helpful guidelines for exactly this situation given by their editors and would therefore know to behave and could for example avoid a disrespectful interruption of the cruel scenery. This example would be included in both categories.
In his book author Kenneth Kobre tries to gain insight on the chaotic tie between ethics and photojournalism. He points that there is no book of rules but merely attempts to give an orientation. He suggests another method of sorting out different ethical categories in photojournalism. This approach is called the Continuum of Control. With this model he wants to help understanding the different levels of influencing a scene as a photographer. He points out the importance of recognizing the various kinds of media: “Far from being a fixed commodity, the photographer’s level of control is variable, logistically and ethically.” 15
The Continuum of Control includes all possible tasks a photojournalist has to take during her career. One day it might be taking pictures of a film star visiting the zoo, another day it might be a village under hostile attack. In relation to the task the freedom of influence and the level of change in control. On one end of the continuum lies for example the photo illustration, which is any kind of photograph, that is artificially enhanced, to be turned into a work of art.
15Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professionals’ Approach,
The photographer has the full level of control because of the completely constructed nature of a photo illustration. Nobody expects it to be anything else but a creation of the photographer’s mind. On the other end of the continuum - and this is more interesting for us - lie for example hard news.
Most photographers, travelling to war areas and Third World countries, will hesitate to ask the people to move or look into the camera for a better picture. What Kobre is trying to emphasize with this model is the idea that different rules apply to different categories of photography. He continues his thoughts by not only pointing out the specific nature of each task, a photojournalist has to bear in mind, but also suggests to internalize two different, ethical mindsets, that one could follow in a challenging situation. 16
Kobre asks the same question as we do in this paper: How should a photographer react and how does she legitimate her behaviour? As a possible solution for this problem he refers to two classic, ethical frameworks, which are going to be explained in a very condensed way to give a basic understanding of the theories. These ideas shall be the basis for the ethical discussion when it comes to photographic examples later on in this thesis.
The first approach is the utilitarian principle, which in a very short definition implies “the greatest good for the greatest number of people.” The main spokesperson for the17 utilitarian idea was John Stuart Mill, who refined the concept, that was brought up by his father James Mill and Jeremy Bentham. Mill emphasizes the idea, that morality comes about, when the relevant actions have a tendency to cause happiness, whilst they are morally wrong whenever they cause suffering. He also points out that individualistic pursuit for happiness is less valuable than the aim to do good for society. 18 This idea can be easily applied to photojournalism: to reach out for the “greater good” means acting within the meaning of the public society. Photojournalists take the responsibility to provide the society with information. Following the utilitarian framework, this means that they for example won’t hesitate to take a photo of an accident or an attack, risking to disturb individual civilians, if it provides important information for a bigger number of people.
16Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
2008, p. 354- 355
17This is a paraphrase of Jeremy Bentham’s quote, an early advocate of utilitarianism, found in Kenneth
Kobre’s Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
2008, p. 354. The original quote is: ‘the greatest
happiness for the greatest number.’
The second approach is the absolutist principle. Compared to utilitarianism it underlines the fact that there are some definite rules, that can’t be overthrown. Certain statements are absolutely true. The notion, that the statement might be possibly wrong gets excluded. Being an absolutist photojournalist, one might for example believe in the right of privacy and will therefore not capture anyone’s pain or grief on film.
Kobre establishes the thought that today most photojournalists consider the utilitarian approach as the right way of responding to the question: Do I take the picture or not?.
Later on I’m going to come back to these two deliberations, when different examples of photos will be discussed in the main part of the thesis with regards to the four problematic issues.
A more definite formulation of ethical guidelines is provided by the NPPA, mentioned earlier. It is advisable to take a closer look at it’s Code of Ethics. The NPPA is the most renowned association for news photographers all over the world. It was founded 1946 with the aim to make information visible, that was by then unaccessible for the public. One of its first achievements was to enforce the use of cameras in courtrooms. Today its main goal 19 is not only the advancement of any kind of visual journalism, but also the provision of an ethical orientation for every photojournalist. As an introduction to the code it reads:
“Photographic and video images can reveal great truths,
expose wrongdoing and neglect, inspire hope and understanding
and connect people around the globe through the language of visual understanding. Photographs can also cause great harm if they are callously intrusive or are manipulated.” 20
This statement follows a listing of guidelines, the Code of Ethics, that arises from the warning, last sentence of the quote above.
A few of those guidelines will be picked up while discussing the four problems. For now a summary of the body of thought of the code will be sufficient. It mentions the main goals of a photojournalist by stating, that the primary ambition is to be accurate. Therefore it is not allowed to modify the photographed object in any way.
19〈https://www.nppa.org/about〉, last access 01.08.2016 20〈https://www.nppa.org/node/5145〉, last access 01.08.2016
Otherwise the purpose of the profession would be failed by deceiving the consumer about the real circumstances. It asks the photographers neither to sabotage other people’s work nor to accept any payment, gifts or bribes. The photographers are requested to think beyond boundaries by connecting the sociological, political and psychological conditions of the particular situation. Furthermore it calls out for decent, unobtrusive and moral behaviour towards the subjects, in front of the camera.
The formulation of the rules remains relatively loose. This might be due to constant changes in the code but also to address as many people as possible all over the world. Because of that, the NPPA opened a forum on their website for photojournalists to discuss specific and unclear situations with their fellow colleagues and members of the committee.
Now, that it is clear, that the relationship between photojournalism and ethics depends on many different factors, like the specific country or editor, as well as on the particular task and that there is no comprehensive book of rules, only ideas of approaching the problem and a set of vaguely formulated guidelines, I want to take a closer look at some a few of the overall sixteen rules given by the NPPA, that seem the most relevant for the questions asked in this paper. The particular rule is going to be stated and a short explanation with appendant examples will be given and the attempt is going to be made to look at, what could happen if the aforementioned examples of ethical frameworks come into operation. During this process the four problems will become clear.
The Problems Photo Manipulation
Thinking about the term “photo manipulation”, one might immediately get an intuitive idea about the meaning of it. Most people might at first think of photoshopped images of stars and celebrities shining from magazine covers, because of the technologically influenced era, we live in. As a matter of fact fiddling with photographs has existed since long before the invention of Photoshop or even computers. Even in the earliest stages of photography it was possible to either influence the photograph before the shot, for example by using daguerreotypes and double-exposing techniques to create special effects, or by manually working on the developed photograph by scratching the surface or adding or changing content with paint or ink.
Even though the methods of manipulating photography have changed over the years, neither the reasons behind it nor the occurrence did. While extreme editing might be accepted in the artistic field of photography and to some extent in glamour photography, it is (and has been) frowned upon in the journalistic field. This is amongst others due to the goal of each photojournalist to provide the viewer with real information as well as to the claim of objectivity. Still there has never been a time when photo manipulation in journalism didn’t exist.
There are multiple reasons for that: people, who couldn’t attend the day of the shooting, are digitally added to the photo, politicians, who want to look more likeable, let there skin be smoothened or the photographer simply wants a more high-grade composition for a bigger success and decides to alter the colours, light and positioning.
The first mentionable incident in the history of journalistic photo manipulation is the story of the cover shot of the National Geographic magazine in 1982, that showed the pyramids of Giza. To make the photo fit with the vertical format of the magazine cover, the original shot was digitally edited and the pyramids were moved a little bit closer together. When this case appeared before the public, the credibility of the magazine was questioned and the photographer of the picture had to leave the company. Afterwards the director of photography of the magazine raised the issue that the editing of the photo was “exactly the same as if the photographer had moved the camera’s position”. 21
21Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
I want to use this statement to ask the question, if it does make a difference to either influence the photo before the shot, by moving the camera and/or adding and removing objects to the scene, or after the shot with digital manipulation.
In the latest edition of the Code of Ethics of the NPPA photojournalists are requested to “resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities” and “not [to] intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events [,while photographing subjects].” 22 The first time this became a real problem and people started thinking about this issue was, when journalist Janet Cooke faked a whole story about an 8-year old heroin addict, for which she had won the Pulitzer Prize. Later on it was discovered, that the boy in the story had never existed and Cooke made everything up in her mind. After that a big wave of ethical deliberations in the form of debates, books and courses spilled over the journalistic profession including photojournalism. 23
Since then the custom of staging photos hasn’t decreased. Many times journalists and photographers had to resign, after the extent of influence, they took on the picture, had been revealed.
The range of incidents of such kind varies from faking the actual content, like in the example before, to interfering by changing small details, before taking the photo, like removing distracting objects out of the frame. Somewhere in between these poles lies the answer to the question: What’s the limit when it comes to staging a scene?
One of the many examples for staging an allegedly candid scene is the case of “The Falling Soldier” by Robert Capa, which was published in 1937 in Life Magazine.
22〈https://www.nppa.org/node/5145〉, last access 17.08.2016 23Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
Robert Capa, Loyalist Militiaman at the Moment of Death
, 1936
This photograph is said to be taken on the 5th of September 1936 and shows the death of a Republican soldier in the Spanish Civil War. In the picture you can see the man collapsing after being shot in the head. His rifle is slipping out of his hand.
After its publication it was acclaimed as one of the most famous and greatest pictures ever taken, depicting a human being right in the moment of his death, shocking the readers with an abrupt impact, that was never shown before in that way.
A couple of decades later people began to doubt the conditions and authenticity of this photo and it became object to one of the biggest controversies in the history of photojournalism. Reasons for that were amongst others the location of the shot, the identity24 of the soldier and primarily the evidence, that the man appeared alive in some of the following contact sheets. It was believed, that Capa was either shooting his photos blindly, without being aware of the subject in front of the lense, or that he was staging the scene. The evidence of both sides of the debate has been relatively vague.
While the opposition persisted on the dubiety of the location, pointing out that the spot, where picture allegedly was taken, is about 30 km from the location, seen in the background of the photo, Capa’s defenders stand behind their believes and brush the vague arguments aside by making use of explicit research.
24Paul Martin Lester, Photojournalism: An Ethical Approach,
To this day the case of this photo has not been solved. In one of the numerous, existing essays and debates on this topic one of the authors Richard Whelan summarizes the problem with the following words:
“I have wrestled with the dilemma of how to deal with a photograph that one believes to be genuine but that one cannot know with absolute certainty to be a truthful documentation. It is neither a photograph of a man pretending to have been shot, nor an image made during what we would normally consider the heat of battle.” 25
Even though Capa never admitted to staging the photo and manipulating the content, this is still an interesting example because of its ambiguity. Until today, 80 years after the photo was taken, the debate is still going on and people are still furious with curiosity and rage about the (possible) falsification.
Fact is, that no matter if Capa actually played with the reality of the situation or if it is an actual candid shot, the picture gained great fame, but by this point perhaps for the wrong reasons. The content of the photo, namely the brutality and ruthlessness of the Spanish Civil War seems now less important than the question of the authenticity of the picture. And this definitely fails the information-focussed intention of the photojournalistic profession.
Looking at the example, one thing should be asserted: staging a scene in a sense, that the content of the photo is not real, but fictional, is never acceptable. Even if Capa didn’t get a chance to take a photo, that would have done justice to the horrors, he had actually seen during his time in the Spanish Civil War, he shouldn’t have re-enacted the scene and published it as a candid shot. There is no chance to prove if this photo is a copy of reality or made up in Capa’s mind. If he had marked it as an artistic re-enactment to represent the terror of war, maybe it would have been accepted as a symbol and example. Imitating and fabricating content in documentary photography is unjustifiable, because it is inconsistent with the essential nature of photojournalism.
The second kind of photo manipulation has been an issue only for the last couple of decades and is a bit more slippery than the first problem. Since the advent of Photoshop and other editing programs everybody has been able to work on the lights, colours, shapes and composition of photographs. Nothing is impossible.
25Richard Whelan, This is War: Robert Capa at Work
, Interview from
In photojournalism of course there are certain restrictions regarding the digital editing like rule number six from the NPPA Code of Ethics:
“Editing should maintain the integrity of the photographic images’ content and context. Do not manipulate images or add or alter sound in any way that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.” 26
The phrasing of this guideline is relatively vague about the exact limits of digital editing. To underline this thought one recent and famous example shall be put on record, which is a photograph taken in 2013 in Gaza by Swedish photojournalist Paul Hansen.
Paul Hansen, Gaza Burial
, 2013
The photo shows a large group of men walking through a narrow alley straight towards the camera. Four men in the front of the picture carry the dead bodies of two young boys wrapped in white cloth. The distress and grief in the men’s faces is obvious. The story behind this picture is that the two children were killed, when their house was attacked by an Israeli airstrike and now carried to their own funeral in their uncle's arms.
A few days earlier Israel had begun to bomb Gaza as a response to a previous rocket attack by the Palestinian military. During these attacks 150 people were killed in Gaza, 103 of them were civilians and 30 of them children. 27
26〈https://www.nppa.org/node/5145〉, last access 20.08.2016
For capturing the aftermath of the attack with all the pain and sorrow, Hansen won the first prize in the category for spot news in the competition of the renowned World Press Photography Award in 2013. Only a short while later the accusation emerged, that the photo was supposedly fake. Many people came up with complaints about the over-dramatic and unnatural lighting and the men’s facial expressions, which were too refined. Some people even suspected that the picture was made up of at least three different photos. But at least this allegation has been proven wrong pretty soon after it has been brought up. 28
It seemed likely that Hansen touched up the photo with a suitable program. When the jury was asked about this, they admitted that the award winning photo had been edited afterwards and they had the original shot available. This caused a public outrage amongst fellow photojournalists. Even though nobody can really call the picture a fake, because Hansen in fact went to Gaza and took several photos of the funeral march that day, in their opinion the digital editing afterwards went too far: “The modifications made by Hansen fail to adhere to the acceptable journalism standards used by Reuters, Associated Press, Getty Images, National Press Photographer's Association, and other media outlets.” 29
Both Hansen and the jury have admitted that the lighting and colouring of the photo had been polished up afterwards, but have refused all allegations and claimed that everything happened in line with the conditions and restrictions. Effectively he didn’t change anything about the content. It was merely technical embellishment.
This case is insofar interesting as one might ask themselves why Hansen felt the need to improve his already extraordinary photograph. Maybe he did it for the fame. Maybe his focus is directed at the artistic features of a photograph and his personal style. Looking at his portfolio this could possibly be the case. Maybe he only wanted to reach a greater audience, for them to learn about the brutality of the war in Gaza, by making the picture as appealing as possible for the human eye. This would be in a sense an utilitarian mode of behaviour. Hansen might have known about the impact this photo might have on people and wanted to increase the number of people, he wanted to reach with the photo. He succeeded when he won the award.
28〈http://www.wired.co.uk/article/photo-faking-controversy〉, last access 20.08.2016
29〈
As an absolutist on the other hand, he maybe even would have refused to take a photo of dead children and their grieving parents at all, because of the right for privacy and the picture would have never existed. As an absolutist who did take the photo he would have internalised the rule, that forbids photojournalists to personally influence the product before or after the shot. Maybe he still would have won, because of the rousing story told in the picture.
This isn’t by far the only case of digital enhancement of photographs in competitions. Last year in 2015 a big amount of competitors for the award of the National Press Photographer of the year has been disqualified for altering their images both for altering the image by staging and digital editing.
Thinking about Hansen’s photo, that one the first prize in its category and the title “Photo of the Year”, even though it had been touched up, it is really time to ask about the limits of digital editing concerning news photography. Maybe, if the second winner of that particular competition would have done the same kind of embellishing on her submission she would have won. Thinking a bit further, over-editing a photograph for a competition bears comparison with athletes enhancing their physical abilities by doping in sports competitions. If everybody does it, how can true skill and quality be appreciated?
Looking back at both examples, which are almost one century apart, it became clear, that the manipulation of photographs has been around since the earliest days of photography. The two different photos depict human suffering in its purest kind: death by violence. It is important to us, the public, who can’t attend the moment ourselves, to see those pictures of war and crisis, of fellow human beings dying, so we can be aware of the particular situation. As explained earlier the role of the photojournalist is, to open a window for the audience to look directly into the real scene. Only then outside observers can gain the opportunity to empathise and, in the end, to contribute to change. This can only happen, when the photos, that are printed in newspapers, broadcasted on TV and uploaded on websites, tell nothing but the truth.
Now the question is how far photographers and editors can go in editing the photo to, as mentioned before, attract a large amount of people. In his book Kobre lists up a number of surveys to point out, that the audience is getting more and more used to and appealed by digitally altered images and prefers for example an artificially brightened up set of teeth over the original smile.
He quotes photography critic Andy Grundberg, who said: “In the future, readers of newspaper and magazines will probably view news pictures more as illustrations than as reportage, since they can no longer distinguish between a genuine image and one that has been manipulated.” 30
Therefore it is every photojournalist’s duty to always attempt to make out the correct relationship between the role of being a reporter and the role as an artist. A photo of higher artistic value will of course attract more people to look over, when they pass the news stand on their way to work.
That’s why the strict statement of “the photographer’s role is to record not to influence” should be reassessed and the guidelines for photojournalistic photo manipulation31 should be more directed at a notion of: “produce both a truthful picture and one that demonstrates artistic merit.” The message and the content should always be in the focus,32 whilst the artistic appearance should be instrumentalized to catch the viewer’s eye. Therefore It can be argued that it should be accepted to influence the scene partially for the better picture: for example taking a distracting object, like an empty bottle out of the frame. The same applies to digital manipulation like the improvement of light and colours. The utilitarian approach justifies this statement. Appearance is used to spread the message. The more people will see the photo, the more people will get involved and contribute to change.
As long as the content or the message don’t get fundamentally changed and the photographer, as well as the reader and hopefully the photographed subject benefit from the editing, slight and advantageous photo manipulation should be accepted. In the end it always depends on the particular case and it is difficult to exactly define a rule for this issue.
30Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
2008, p. 386
31Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
2008, p. 361
32Shiela Reaves, “Re-examining the Ethics of of Photographic Posing: Insights from the rank-and-file Members
of ASMP”, in: Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professional’s Approach,
Aestheticization of Human Suffering
Sometimes the enhancement of a photo can go too far and the hierarchy of content and aesthetics gets reversed. In the following point I want to elaborate the thoughts on the photographer’s role as an artist. It is closely connected to the issue of Photo Manipulation, as it deals with one of the possible reasons for touching up a picture beyond the inflicted restrictions of documentary photography, even though it isn’t directly related to the wilful and active manipulation of photos, but to its effects on the viewers.
Some journalistic photographs are aesthetically striking in such manner, that critics claim, that it’s more likely that these pictures call for applause for the technical perfection than for attention for the content. Therefore it is advisable to look out for the line between documentary and artistic photography and possible overlaps.
One man, who is famous for his stunningly beautiful pictures, is the Brazilian photographer and journalist Sebastiao Salgado. Since the beginning of his career he’s been engaged with socially critical issues and with the mission of capturing social deficits mostly in his home continent of South America, but also in other continents, like Africa.
Sebastiao Salgado, Untitled
from Sahel: End of the Road, 2004
This is one of many examples, which demonstrate both Salgado’s favoured themes and style. In this picture two babies drinking milk from the breasts of a woman can be seen. The bodies of the children are thin and emaciated, their heads seem unproportionally big.
They are wrapped in a light cloth. A darker cloth is covering the woman’s chest, but parts of her skinny arms and her haggard breasts are visible. Considering the artistic rules of photography, it is close to perfection: the symmetry of the mother’s body with twin babies, both feeding at the same time; the framing, in which the heads of the babies are on the perfect line, which cuts the image in half; the shading of white, black and grey; the high contrast.
This picture is part of a series, that concentrates on Sahel, a region in Africa, that was struck by a drought. It is assumed that about one million people died due to extreme malnutrition. For 15 months Salgado had travelled the area and captured the people, who decided to flee from the land suffering from hunger, thirst and illness. This series was the starting point for Salgado to photograph projects about human suffering all around the world: political conflict, famine, poverty, epidemic, survival and catastrophe. Susan Sontag said about him that he “specializes in world misery.” She didn’t think of this statement as a 33 compliment. As a matter of fact Salgado’s photographs give reason for an extensive controversy. The main item of review concerns the aesthetic features of Salgado’s photographs.
People complain, that his pictures, which mostly depict human suffering, are too beautiful. Usually this is not a problem when it comes to evaluating photographs, but in journalism, especially in spot news, it reveals itself as an unforeseen challenge:
“Salgado is far too busy with the compositional aspects of his pictures—with finding the ‘grace’ and ‘beauty’ in the twisted forms of his anguished subjects. And this beautification of tragedy results in pictures that ultimately reinforce our passivity toward the experience they reveal. To aestheticize is the fastest way to anesthetize the feeling of those who are witnessing it. Beauty is a call to admiration, not to action.” 34 This quote by Salgado’s most severe critic Ingrid Sischy makes her point clear, that Salgado’s approach of reporting news gets in the way of one goal of photojournalism: the call for involvement and action. The artistic merit is in the spotlight. Admiration is not action. His exclusively monochrome photographs distinguish themselves with a profound contrast and exposure, a perfect balance of symmetry or a precise implementation of the rule of thirds and a sharp eye for details.
33Susan Sontag, Regarding the Pain of Others
, 2003, in:
〈http://niemanreports.org/articles/when-peoples-suffering-is-portrayed-as-art/〉, last access 21.08.2016
34 Ingrid Sischy, Good Intentions
, 1991, in:
Even if the reader recognises the moral message of the picture, Salgado always puts a strong focus on the individual, the human dignity. The bigger picture, the background of social suffering and crisis, is secondary.
In a universally connected world, where atrocities happen every day and the news are overflown by photos and footage, it is difficult to attract people’s interest and attention. Salgado succeeds in this with his distinctive style. Even though most of them might only look at his photos as artworks, some of them might react to the content. Because of his fame, he reaches such a broad amount of people, that this is possible by all means.
The argumentation regarding the aesthetization of human suffering is similar to the conclusion of the last point made on Paul Hansen’s award-winning photo. Utilitarianism approves of Salgado’s work. If absolutism was applied to his example, he would have acted differently and for example used the budget, really used for the realisation of the photobook, to invest in a sustainable battle against hunger. No one knows if the effects of this would have been more influential than his photography.
Even though the debate on Salgado’s work might be going on forever, it is undeniable that he seriously contributed to the photojournalistic profession and mission. The visual strength of his pictures turned him into a superstar and his photographs into unforgettable creations both for the artworld as for photojournalism. In spite of the violation of the rule of finding a balance between the artistic part and the journalistic focus, his photos reach out to a diversified audience.
Salgado’s example and fame is a special case. To remain more general, it is advisable to put a more severe focus on the content instead of the appearance. Of course in some of the best photographs a certain balance between the documentary and artistic merits might be sensible. But in the brief moment of pressing the trigger the content of the photo should be the center of attention, while aesthetic perfection and beauty should be secondary. Aesthetics can be used to lift a photo to another level and to attract more people’s attention, but in the hierarchy of significance, it can be merely be understood as a tool.
Dilemma of Acute Aid
In this point the photographer’s individual challenge will be examined, when facing an ethically and personally problematic situation, whilst fulfilling the job of photographing human suffering. It is the dilemma of being a professional photojournalist and being a sensitive, empathic human being. As explained before, one of the major claims for photojournalism is authenticity. The viewer asks for a representation of reality and staging or excessive editing are undesirable. Does that mean that the photographer should exclusively function as a silent observer even in situations of violence and danger?
Interestingly enough, this problem is not mentioned in the NPPA’s Code of Ethics. It is an individual decision. That’s what makes it even more difficult. Usually magazines and newspaper provide their photojournalists either with specific guidelines or at least an orientation, but in the split second of deciding to take a picture or not, every photojournalist has to fend for themselves.
Imagine a scenario, in which the photojournalist has to decide between her professional mission of recording events as well as spreading them to the public and her moral conscience, which might tell her to provide instant help instead of taking a photo.
This might be for example a starving child, like we’ve seen in examples of Salgado’s collection. A photographer like Salgado could have made a different decision and instead of turning up with a camera and a selection of different lenses, he could have decided to bring plenty of food or to build a well or a school. The question, which results from this example, however is, which decision would have had a bigger impact on the suffering of the child in the long run. To dissolve this hypothetical example, it is fair to say, that Salgado’s work did not only have a big effect on his personal fame, but also on the awareness and involvement in the areas he covered. The dilemma comes about in spontaneous decision making, because the long-term effects of each decision cannot be known.
The two following examples are similar in kind but very different in their outcome. Both describe the dilemma of a photographer in an instant of acute decision making in exceptionally precarious situations.
R. Umar Abbasi, Moments Before Hit by a Subway
, 2012
This picture was taken by New York Post photographer R. Umar Abbasi, seconds before the man, who fell down the platform was hit and killed by the underground at the station in the Times Square area of New York.
When the editors of the newspaper decided to publish one of the photos taken that day and to print it on their front page, a wave of public outrage hit not only the paper, but also the people, who were present at the scene, and the photographer himself. Critics debated Abbasi’s actions, with some saying that he should have helped the man on the tracks instead of taking photos and some defending Abbasi’s choice.
Critics assume that Abbasi didn’t actually attempt to save the man’s life. He claims that he was running towards the edge of the platform while taking the pictures trying to warn the driver of the train with his camera flash, but everything happened way too fast to interfere. Afterwards he supposedly couldn’t even look at the photos but handed in the memory card to his editors and sold the photos to the paper. 35
Regarding this particular case, I first want to bring up a thought on Abbasi’s possible intentions. Some people assume that Abbasi’s behaviour was driven by a selfish pursuit of success and fame, when he was taking the photos.
35〈http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/05/r-umar-abbasi-ny-post-subway-photo-ki-suk-han_n_2243739.ht
At first it seems very attractive to assume that the statement of warning the driver with his flashlight is a lie. Based on the series of photos found on the memory card, people also believe , that he wasn’t running towards the man, but was standing still and taking his time to frame the scene. It seems likely that Abbasi took the opportunity for what it was, namely an36 appealing scene for a photojournalist, took the photos, sold them to the paper and indulged in the (rather controversial) fame. In the end it is pointless to make any assumptions about his intentions. It can never be taken for granted that every photojournalist follows his profession for the greater good over the striving for his own personal fame. There is no possibility to find out the truth behind Abbasi’s actions. What counts and what is interesting to look at is the outcome.
Abbasi, like everybody else on the platform, didn’t help the man. He chose - for one of many possible reasons - to take his picture.
As mentioned earlier in in the introduction, author Kenneth Kobre brings up two opposing, ethical approaches to provide guidance and analyse the decisions of a photojournalist: utilitarianism and absolutism.
In this case the photographer possibly picked the utilitarian way. He followed his role as a photojournalist, who has the duty to inform the public and not to disturb the scene in any way. He is an observer. Abbasi decided to capture this moment of a man’s death at an underground station and to share it with the public. By doing so, he might have raised awareness of the risks and dangers at an underground station, to be careful, to not stand too close to the edge of the platform, to improve the quality of the brakes of the train and so on. From an utilitarian point of view he might not have helped the individual, but he laid the foundation for the well-being for a greater number of people. Now the question might be raised, why Abbasi denied, that he intended to take photos, but only used his flashlight to warn the driver, if his automatic reaction in deed was of an utilitarian nature. This gives reason for doubting his position.
The above-mentioned approach clashes strongly with the absolutist notion. Here the photojournalist is above all a human being, part of a social community with responsibilities and duties. Within an absolutist mindset he would have been obligated to help the man in need.
36〈http://www.imediaethics.org/clues-that-abbasi-lied-about-new-york-post-subway-photo/〉, last access
In an interview photographer Larry Burrows, who worked during the wars in Korea and Vietnam and was honoured with the award for the photographer of the year by the NPPA in 1967, speaks out on this issue as follows:
“Do I have a right to carry on working and leave a man suffering? To my mind, the answer is ‘No, you’ve got to help him.’ You cannot go through these elements without obviously feeling something yourself - you cannot be mercenary in this way because it will make you less of a photographer.” 37
The stance represented in the quote not only makes the dilemma clear again, but also reveals a different sort of mindset. The outcome of this decision-making-process is the complete opposite of the utilitarian approach. Photojournalists like Burrows in many situations decided
not
to take the picture.
An historical example is the story of photojournalist Flip Schulke. Working for Life Magazine he covered amongst others the Cuban revolution under Fidel Castro, natural
catastrophes, space launches, sporting events and famous figures of history. The most intense and striking task of his career came up with the rise of the civil rights movement in the South of the United States in 1956. Because of his close friendship with political leader Martin Luther King Jr. Schulke gained the opportunity to cover the racial clashes in Selma, Alabama from a very close and intimate perspective. Taking some of the most iconic photographs of that period, Schulke got himself into brutal, violent and life-risking situations.
One time he witnessed police deputies beating children to the ground. Schulke took action immediately, dropped his camera and helped the boys and girls to get away. Later on Martin Luther King Jr., who led the march in Selma, criticized Schulkes decision:
“The world doesn’t know this happened, because you didn’t photograph it. I’m not being cold-blooded about it, but it is so much more important for you to take a picture of us getting beaten up.” 38
In this particular situation, Schulke followed an absolutist way of acting. He witnessed injustice and violence committed against children. He immediately sensed the hazard of the situation and interfered as a human being, by actively helping the victims. He didn’t follow his calling as a photojournalist, which ordered him to observe and not to interfere.
37Larry Burrows, in: Daniel R. Bersak, Ethics in Photojournalism: Past, Present and Future,
2006, p.19
38Kenneth Kobre, Photojournalism - The Professionals’ Approach
King criticized him, because he dismissed the opportunity to capture the unjust actions against Afro-American children and to show the public, what had happened.
Learning about those two examples, two situations, in which photographers were torn between extreme decisions, the two opposite parties become obvious. The opinions are split. While some people from the photojournalistic business say that it is more important to follow the code of the profession, other voices call out for the claim that every photojournalist is first of all a human being.
After contrasting many different examples and opinions, it can be argued that the photojournalistic responsibility of observing and informing stands above everything else. Regarding this dilemma in particular, utilitarianism has to assert itself against absolute, irrevocable rules. The reason for this is the nature of the utilitarian message. To capture the moment for the public to experience, has the ability to be of use for an infinite amount of people and for eternity.
It is true that everybody - including photojournalists - has got a social responsibility. As a photojournalist it is necessary to think and act in matters of the bigger picture. As a matter of fact, photography has accompanied human history since its invention. It has witnessed prominent events and helped spreading news better and more approachable to the public. At best it helped create change and better prospects for the future.
Part of the historical significance of photographs is the utilitarian message of the greater good for the greater number of people. This applies not only to the human society of the present moment but concerns a sustainability in society. Photographs have the power to prevent history from repeating itself. Everybody who has seen for example the recordings of piles over piles of naked, starved and emaciated bodies in the concentrations camps of the second World War will agree on preventing anything similar to the events of that time.
Therefore it has to be valid in every situation, in which a photographer has to make the decision between saving one life in the presence or enable the possibility of saving many in the future, that she weighs up these two opposites against each other and comes to the conclusion that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” , to quote a famous 39 character of modern pop culture.
39Leonard Nimoy as Captain Spock, in Star Trek II, The Wrath of Khan
, 1982.
