Wild card

 

Ethical concerns in Photojournalism

    People say that a photo can say a thousand words, but what if that photo has been edited and those thousand words are not accurate. Photojournalism is a great storytelling tool. Whether it be photos of world changing natural disasters or wars or even major sports events photography can help bring an element of emotional storytelling that engages the audience better than just an article. However, when that photo is edited and that story gets changed just a little bit it can cause a news outlet and photojournalist to lose credibility and trust with their audience. 

    It is unheard of for a photo to be used in an article that has not been edited in some way. However, when a photographer takes it beyond just changing the exposure or contrast and starts to add or subtract key elements from the image that is when the problem arises. In 2006, a Reuters photographer in Beirut was fired after he was accused of doctoring an image showing the aftermath of an Israeli air strike in Beirut. Compared to Adnan Hajj's original image it was obvious that Hajj had doctored the image to make the smoke from the air strike bigger and the darker. Tom Szlukovenyi, Reuters global picture editor, stated "There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image." Hajj was fired and all of his images was removed from the company's database. 

    

    Photo manipulation is still a problem in today photojournalism. The World Press Photo, which is one of the most prestigious photojournalism contests, has disqualified several entries in recent years. In 2015 alone over 20% of Finalists were disqualified for manipulation. 

    Photographers have even been accused of staging photos or posing subjects even going as far as to recreate events. Before the creation of AI photographers would have to physically rearrange photo elements. However, now all a photographer, or really anybody, would have to do is ask AI programs to create "reality" from scratch. In 2024, a Belgian Photographer was under fire for creating AI generated photos which he called "Putin's Dream". Carl De Keyzer used his photographs from his previous trips and projects in Russia. While Keyzer says that the series is a "Comment on the horrors of (the Ukraine) war caused by the dream of basically one man" and that using AI was just a tool in creating the images. The series was meet with severe criticism for Keyzer's use of AI. 

    The use of AI-generated images that cause people to be wary of real images. This is a prime example of "liars' dividend." Lairs dividend is defined by Britannica as "where people will claim that real information is mis- and disinformation." Savannah Dodd , founder and director of the Photography Ethics Centre , believes that truth and trust are not the only problems when it comes to AI- generated images. Dodd believes that biases of generators could lead to the spread of stereotypes. 

    In conclusion, photographers must take caution when taking and editing photos. If caution is not taken it can lead to mistrust and not to mention the spread of misinformation. With the rise of AI generated photos, it is now even more important for news outlets to maintain authenticity in all aspects of their reporting.