Photojournalism-3
This post avoids issues of legality, taste and privacy in photojournalism, and instead examines two aspects of the ethics discussion that directly impact the credibility of photojournalists:
1. manipulating the scene (before or after a picture is taken)
2. manipulating the photograph
Both of these situations have probably affected “real” pictures since photography was invented.
Politicians have a big incentive to appear their best in pictures, and that may be a legitimate price for photojournalists to pay for access. However, most neutral observers agree that President George Bush crossed the line into manipulation when he staged a speech on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln in front of a huge sign declaring “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED” on May 1, 2003.
At the time, no one took responsibility for the banner, and the White House ambiguously left completely open the interpretation of what mission was accomplished by whom. In cases like these, photojournalists and editors are usually aware of the manipulation and make judgment calls about their pictures. This was a TIME cover.
On a more clownish note, Arthur Fellig (AKA Weegee) enjoyed a reputation as a famous New York photographer noted for his willingness do anything to “get the picture”. In a famous photo that ran in LIFE magazine, December 6, 1943, he contrived a social commentary.
He hired and dressed an alcoholic woman, placed her near the entrance to an opera house, and asked her to gawk at socialites. In one picture he managed to lie about content to his editors and combined payment, heartless exploitation, re-creation and staging, all considered serious ethics violations today. Out of context it is a hilarious picture, and it sold lots magazines. (Disclosure! I cropped and annotated this famous work of art.)
