This photo-editing revolution has some believing it will lead to the “downfall of photojournalism” in the United States. Photojournalists are becoming less credible and the public is losing faith in the accuracy and truth of the news. These doctored photographs are winning the Pulitzer Prize and creating a more competitive and unfair environment in the photojournalism world. Photojournalists are feeling the pressure to produce an above-average photo in order to receive publicity, and, to do this they often resort to doctoring and editing photographs.
In 2007, an Ohio newspaper, The Toledo Blade, received a call about suspicions that they had run an altered news photo on the front page four days earlier. The culprit was the famous Allan Detrich, who had a reputation as a brilliant photojournalist. Detrich was twice named Ohio Photographer of the Year and a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 1998. He denied that the photograph he sent to the editor was the photograph he meant to send. He claimed that the altered photograph was for his personal use, and he had mixed up the photos while sending them to the paper. After investigations, 79 of his photographs submitted for publication in early 2007 were found to have been doctored. Detrich admitted to habitually erasing “people, tree limbs, utility poles, electrical wires, light switches and cabinet knobs” from his photographs, as well as adding things like hockey pucks and basketballs into the frame.
Allan Detrich was highly revered and rewarded for his work, but his work was often altered, giving him an unfair advantage with respect to other photojournalists in competition. He is not the only famous journalist to be caught doctoring and altering photographs running in newspapers, on television, in magazines and on billboards. This practice is so commonly used today that it destroys the fundamentals of true, respectable photojournalism.
Doctoring photographs is so easy and so common that there are now professions and organizations completely dedicated to discovering these photos and revealing them. This profession is called “Digital Forensics” and these scientists study the light, depth and pixels of photographs. Doctored photos can be detected by finding spoiled pixel correlations, inconsistent specular highlights and light-source direction, as well as other advanced computer-based techniques.
Why are doctored photographs so bad? Because the public relies on journalists, news anchors, broadcasters and photographers to deliver the truth. With doctored photographs, the credibility and reputation of these sources is at risk. People become increasingly suspicious of news sources as these photos continue to be revealed, and their trust is waiving. The art of photography is at risk because people don’t need to take a perfect picture anymore; they can just doctor it to their pleasure. Photography is an art form, and it needs to remain fair in order to survive. These photographers ultimately do create a better picture, a more newsworthy picture, maybe a picture that will win an award. But the cost of the credibility of the individual photographer and the reputation of the entire journalism field is not worth the rewards reaped for these altered pictures.
Ricchiardi, Sherry. (2007). Distorted Picture. Retrieved from http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4383
Scientific American. (2010). Digital Forensics: Altered Lance Armstrong Photo Explained. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=digital-image-forensics-lance-armstrong
No comments:
Post a Comment