Reading the Baradell essay about photojournalism and ethics, and how that's changing as we enter the digital era, made me think of two things. One is this podcast: [http://www.radiolab.org/2012/sep/24/in-the-valley-of-the-shadow-of-doubt/] about a very old example of a manipulated photograph; another is that ethical reform is a great example of trying to solve a symptom rather than a problem. While certain ethical standards are necessary, and a good idea, relying on them to enforce journalistic "truth" is foolish.
The real answer is in the critical audience. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, readers of newspapers knew that what they were reading might be suspect; biased, incomplete, or manipulated in other ways. They knew that for issues they really cared about, they had to do more that accept what was given to them. People were still fooled by things, of course, but the mass acceptance that they were being presented with the truth wasn't there. That critical outlook has been lost, and its rebirth will do more to solve problems of the ethics of digital photojournalism than any amount of rules or standards.
No comments:
Post a Comment