When is it ethical to photoshop images? (Post for comment)

Photo manipulation has been around almost as long as photography itself, but as digital imaging hardware and software has both advanced and come down in price, the practice of digital image manipulation has become much more commonplace and faked photos are becoming harder to detect. In fact, digital photo manipulation -commonly referred to as 'photoshopping'- has recently become a popular pastime, and many consider this photographic fakery to be a new art form. But when it works its way into photojournalism and the media, the issue of ethics comes to the forefront.

How far can we take digital image manipulation and still maintain journalistic integrity?

The idea of the right hand side photo is to make the subject appear more sinister. Times Magazine admitted having manipulated the picture

A recent New York Times article explores the issue:

(...) feminist legislators in France, Britain and Norway say, and they want digitally altered photos to be labeled. In June, the American Medical Association adopted a policy on body image and advertising that urged advertisers and others to “discourage the altering of photographs in a manner that could promote unrealistic expectations of appropriate body image.”

Take the case above, where GQ magazine featured a digitally slimmed photo of actress Kate Winslet. Upon seen the cover, Winslet complained that the retouching was “excessive.” “I don’t look like that and more importantly I don’t desire to look like that. I can tell you that they’ve reduced the size of my legs by about a third,” said Winslet.

When does it become ethically problematic to manipulate (enhance) images in Photoshop? Publicists as well as journalists should understand that digital manipulation is not solely an aesthetic issue. There are issues of veracity at stake, like the image below:

The photo above shows a digital composite of a British soldier in Basra, gesturing to Iraqi civilians urging them to seek cover. The photo was published on the front page of the Los Angeles Times shortly after the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. Brian Walski, a staff photographer for the Los Angeles Times and a 30-year veteran of the news business, was fired after his editors discovered that he had combined two of his photographs to “improve” the composition.

This photographer has two images. One may think, what's wrong with blending the two to create one that is more telling? After all he took both photos. Well, the problem is that the photo shown above is not real. In fact, with digital processing, there is almost no limit to what can be done to an image, and many things are done to images with the best intentions.

The question is, when does the pursuit of aesthetics violate our ethics? Changes can be made to images that are undetectable, so much so that there is now discussion that photographs will no longer be allowed as evidence in courts of law.

This is not to say that we should get rid of Photoshop, a valuable design tool. The problem is what to do with the tool, how to use it wisely.

What do you think?

I will close this comment this Sunday @ 11pm.

Scandal in Penn State!

Our story starts here: Former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky, once considered Joe Paterno's (photo above) heir apparent, was charged with sexually assaulting eight boys over a 15-year period. Among the allegations was a 2002 incident in which a graduate assistant for the team said he saw Sandusky assault a boy in the shower at the Nittany Lions' practice center.

Update: Two Penn State officials surrendered Monday on charges that they failed to report suspected child-sexual abuse by a former coach and committed perjury in their related grand jury testimony.

The pair are accused of failing to alert police to complaints that former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky had sexually abused eight boys. They are also charged with lying to a state grand jury investigating the former defensive coordinator. Schultz, 62, and Curley, 57, are innocent and will seek to have the charges dismissed, their lawyers said. Curley's lawyer, Caroline Roberto, called the case weak while Schultz's lawyer, Tom Farrell, said the men did what they were supposed to do by informing their superiors of the accusations.

Why did they not report the complaints?  

How about Paterno? The NYTimes reports the fate of the famous coach: 

The Board of Trustees has yet to determine the precise timing of Mr. Paterno’s exit, but it is clear that the man who has more victories than any other coach at college football’s top level and who made Penn State a prestigious national brand will not coach another season. Discussions about how to manage his departure have begun, according to the two people. The board is scheduled to meet on Friday, and Gov. Tom Corbett will attend.

What's the problem with Paterno? He told his boss about the complaints -as he should have. But there is this perception:  

Mr. Paterno has been widely criticized for failing to involve the police when he learned of the 2002 incident involving the young boy. Additionally, two top university officials — Gary Schultz, the senior vice president for finance and business, and Tim Curley, the athletic director — were charged with perjury and failure to report to the authorities what they knew of the allegations, as required by state law.

In other words, though Paterno has not been charged in the matter, it is his failure to report to the authorities what he knew about the 2002 incident has become a flashpoint, stirring anger on the board and an outpouring of public criticism about his handling of the matter.

Who is responsible in this affair? The management? Sandusky?  Are Schultz and Curley responsible of wrongdoing? Should Paterno be terminated? If so, why? Go ahead!

I'm closing this post next Tuesday, November 15, at 11pm. 

Autopsies, body parts & whistle blowers

Check out this news on NPR. Apparently the e Air Force mortuary that receives America's war dead and prepares them for burial lost portions of human remains twice in 2009, prompting the Air Force to discipline three senior officials for "gross mismanagement."

A year-long Air Force investigation reviewed 14 sets of allegations of improper handling of war remains as reported by three whistleblower workers at Dover Air Force Base, Del. That is where all war dead are received from foreign battlefields to be identified, autopsied and prepared for transfer to their families.

What is it?

In addition to the two cases of lost body pieces, the Air Force reviewed allegations that mortuary officials acted improperly in sawing off an arm bone that protruded from the body of a Marine in a way that prevented his body from being placed in his uniform for viewing before burial. The Marine's family had requested seeing him in his uniform but was not consulted about or told of the decision to remove the bone.

Why is education important?

Topics for review (Chapters 9 & 10)

Chapter 9

Assumption of risk and to refuse dangerous work, p. 486 
Legitimate and Illegitimate influence, p. 476, 477
Drug testing, (4-point issues),  p. 484
Hawthorne effect, p. 494
Informed consent, p. 479
Job satisfaction
Management styles, p. 489
Maternity leave, p. 481
OSHA, p. 4
off-the-job-conduct,
Personality tests, p. 482
Polygraph Tests (assumptions), 3 point evaluation for taking them, p. 480, 481

Chapter 10

Abuse of official position, p. 542
Bribes, p. 546
Gifts and entertainment, p. 550 (look at the 6-point criteria for gifts)
Company loyalty, p. 538
Conflict of interest, p. 539
Grease payment
Insider trade, p. 542
Kickbacks, p. 546
Proprietary data, p. 544
Self-interest
Trade secrets: 3 arguments for legally protecting trade secrets, p. 544, 545
U.S. vs O'Hagan, p. 543
Whistle blowing: (5 factors to consider), p. 555, 556
_______
Here is the link for your textbook.