From (c) 1999
The research path in photojournalism ethics is neither straight nor
narrow. It is strewn with pitfalls so large that sound methodology alone
cannot be your guide. The purpose of this discourse is to help you avoid
the primordial ooze that awaits unsuspecting researchers who venture out
unprepared into the field of photojournalism ethics.
Is There Ever a Definitive Right or Wrong?
This is always a dilemma for ethicists and should be for researchers.
Your moral judgment may be right for you or your newspaper, but it is
wrong to deduce that your moral judgment, or that of your survey pool, is
ever right for everyone. It is therefore particularly important to qualify
your conclusions based on the demographics of your pool. This is a
particular problem in photojournalism research because often the situation
in question will involve more than one person and therefore more than one
perspective. The photographer may feel he or she acted in an ethical
manner, yet the subject might feel that the photographer acted
unethically. The real problem is that they may both be right.
Have You Considered the External Influences and Circumstances?
This can be a particular problem when you are doing research in areas
of print journalism. When you are judging a photograph or having others
judge a photograph, are you judging the ethics of the photographer or the
ethics of the picture editor? What policies guide the photographer and who
decided to publish the picture in question? Has the photographer been told
to photograph everything possible and leave the editing and ethics
decisions to the editor? How should a photographer react to this
directive? Was the photographer influenced by the actions of the competing
newspaper's photographer who took a similar picture? Can you, the
researcher, make a sound decision about the photographer's behavior when
you were not at the scene and have not experienced the mood and external
influences that may have guided the photographer to take or not take a
certain picture? Does it matter when the picture was taken? Did the
photographer make a decision to take the picture rather than to help the
subject or did the photographer take the picture after the rescue squad
had already arrived? What about unpublished pictures? If an editor decides
that a picture should not run, does that absolve the photographer of
questionable ethical practices? Part of the researcher's role is to sort
through this maze before bringing the issue forward for debate. There are
numerous examples in the literature of researchers who failed to present
adequate information about an event to allow their survey participants to
offer an educated opinion.
Are You Using a Consistent and Quantifiable Measurement Scale?
Are there degrees of ethical behavior? Is it fair to ask your
respondents to judge a particular set of circumstances as highly ethical
versus ethical or as a numerical value on an ethical scale of 1-10? Is it
even necessary to attempt to quantify your results or can the researcher
draw adequate conclusions from answers to open-ended questions? I don't
believe something can be highly ethical or barely ethical and I have never
seen an adequate set of definitions which differentiates between degrees
of ethical behavior. If you plan to use such a scale, be certain to
include definitions of your categories.
Is It Valid to Generalize the Specific?
Some researchers examine actual events but generalize them within their
study or survey. The question will read "A photographer is photographing
the victims of a car accident" or "A photographer crosses a police line."
This assumes that all car accidents are the same or that all police
departments treat photographers the same way. This type of generalized
research can be valid, but the results should not be applied to any
specific occurrence, even the one the original questions may have been
derived from. Perhaps we need to include a research docudrama disclaimer,
"the study is based on actual events, but . . ."
Have You Tested for Cultural Bias?
What influences have had a part in formulating the ethical standards of
the participants you are studying and the members of your survey subject
pool? If I was raised in the city and you were raised in a rural area; if
I were raised as a Catholic and you were raised as a Baptist; if I grew up
in Brazil and you grew up in Brooklyn; if I was a child of the 1960s and
you were a child of the 1980s; if my father was a policeman and your
father was a journalist; how might these external factors influence our
ethical views? Some or all of these, as well as other socioeconomic and
demographic statistics, may skew our data. How do we know we have an
unbiased pool if we do not even know what things influence our ethical
decision-making processes? It may be important to modify how you measure
for bias in a survey or interview pool. Do you need to know where your
subjects fall on a societal scale of ethical/ unethical behavior? Do you
need to pretest every subject and then factor their ethics rating against
their responses? Although it is not possible to account for every possible
cultural bias that your pool may contain, it is your responsibility, as a
researcher, subject your study to the greatest possible rigor.
What Do We Hope to Accomplish by Doing Research in Photojournalism
Ethics?
The best we can hope for, in my opinion, is to identify issues that
should be brought forth for debate and discussion. Most photojournalists
and picture editors receive their ethics training on deadline and may not
have the time or historical perspective necessary to appropriately address
the complexities of the situation. There is more to ethics than "use your
best judgment" although many publications use this directive with their
photographers. The researcher's role is not to hand down judgments from
his or her ivory tower, but to lend historical and philosophical
perspectives to the arguments, gather data that supports or questions
hypotheses, ask new questions about old beliefs, and interpret the results
of research as it applies to the existing body of knowledge and the norms
of the profession.
A REVIEW OF SELECTED LITERATURE
The ethical behavior of photographers and the use of their images has
been a topic of debate for many years. In 1890, in The American Annual
of Photography and Photographic Almanac, Henry Harrison Suplee wrote
an article entitled "The Ethics of Hand Cameras" in which he advocated
resistance to the nuisance of uninvited public snap-shooting and in 1899
in the American Journal of Photography there is an article entitled
"The Casuistry of Photographic Ethics" that discusses how snap-shooters
invaded the privacy of others in public places.
Much of the recent literature is case-study oriented and relies on
expert opinion rather than quantifiable data. There have been attempts to
research areas involving visual ethics that use traditional communication
research methodologies. These studies form a foundation for additional
research that will help decision makers formulate policy and judge
individual images and events. The following review provides an insight
into the available source materials for practitioners and researchers.
They are included for your consideration and to demonstrate potential
areas of disagreement when researching this field.
One of the best sources for juried research articles on visual ethics
is the semiannual Journal of Mass Media Ethics that began
publication in 1986. Articles on visual ethics appear regularly and the
fourth issue of the Journal, published in Spring/Summer 1987, was a
special issue on photojournalism ethics.
Journal of Mass Media Ethics
Vol. 1, No. 1
Fall/Winter 1985-86
"Codes Should Address Exploitation of Grief by Photographers"
George E. Padgett
The author argues that the media has no right to bring moments of
private grief to the public forum of the newspaper page or evening
newscast. The article points a finger at organizations that award these
pictures with the field's highest honors, including the Pulitzer Prize,
and the failure of present media codes of ethics to adequately provide
adequate guidelines for dealing with grief situations.
The author warns that "if the press does not clean up its act relative
to the issue of privacy, the courts may decide to step in at some point in
the not-too-distant future. While there is no precedent for the regulation
of grief exploitation as an invasion of privacy, the vehicle for doing so
already exists in common law privacy. A sub-section of privacy law
prevents the publication of private matters, particularly when such
publication violates ordinary decencies."
I agree with many of the author's complaints and every editor,
reporter, and photographer should read this article. I am still not
convinced, however, that the answer lies in any one code of ethics or any
one set of rules. For example, the author believes that "the pain and
tears of those who survived (the 1984 California McDonald's massacre) had
no place in the national news" and that "while the massacre at Beirut was
news of national and international significance as were those American
soldiers whose lives were lost, the funeral services and the tears of
family members were not."
I would argue that the tears of the living are a more potent weapon
against the wrongs of society than the blood of the dead. I would argue
that the pictures from California might serve to convince my readers that
the importing and manufacturing of semi-automatic weapons should be
banned. I would argue that those servicemen belonged to all Americans and
that my readers wanted to be at the funeral services and share in that
grief, if only through a picture. I would argue that it is usually not the
presence of the media at the event as much as it is the irresponsible
behavior of one or more members of the media at the event that causes the
problem.
There are, no doubt, photojournalists who invade the privacy of their
subject's grief, who make sensitive situations worse and who give the
profession a black eye. But there are also many photojournalists who are
sensitive, caring human beings, who struggle with the ethics of their
profession and have shed many a sympathetic tear after a difficult
assignment.
Every grief situation is different. No one guideline will cover them
all. We should continue to discuss these situations in our papers, and at
our universities and seminars in order to establish precedents that will
help guide us to be responsible journalists who are sensitive to our
subjects and honest with our readers.
Journal of Mass Media Ethics (special issue on photojournalism ethics)
Vol. 2, No. 2
Spring/Summer 1987
"Video Ethics: The Dilemma of Value Balancing"
Robert Steele
Summary
This article resulted from a participant-observation study at two
anonymous major-market television stations for 21/2 months. The writer
immersed himself in the day-to-day activities of local television news
gathering and dissemination. He conducted in-depth, private, taped
interviews with many photojournalists and journalists about their work,
their attitudes, and their ethical beliefs. The thrust of the study was to
gain insight into the structure of ethical reasoning.
Comment
This study provides an interesting look into the psyche of the
television news photographer and explores some of the value judgments he
or she faces while shooting on location. The researcher attempts to
categorize certain patterns of ethical reasoning under such labels as veil
of ignorance and utilitarianism and to isolate influences that cause
certain behavior patterns, including an interesting overview of the role
of competition, peer pressure, and the role of producers. This study is a
good overview of the issues and provides future researchers with numerous
paths to explore.
The author concludes that the individuals he interacted with were
generally acting in ways they felt were ethical. Researchers who wish to
expand on this study should be wary of the participant-observation
methodology. Even unethical subjects might tend to act ethically when
working under the researcher's microscope.
"TV News Photographer as Equipment: A Response"
Jeffrey Marks
Summary
This article is written in response to the study in the Steele article
just discussed. It is a call for the inclusion of the photojournalist as
an equal member of the production team so that his or her voice can be
heard in the editorial decision-making processes.
Comment
The premises of this response are that photojournalists are usually not
as well educated through formal schooling as reporters and that managers
often treat photographers as pieces of equipment and fail to include them
in the ethical decision-making process. Although these are presented under
the subhead "A Few Generalities," it would have been helpful to footnote
them to some quantitative data. The recommendations that the author
provides to rectify this situation are excellent and should be considered
by station managers, regardless of whether their staff demographics
parallel the author's profile.
"Coalesce or Collide?
Ethics, Technology, and TV Journalism 1991"
Don E. Tomlinson
Summary
This article explores how new technology, particularly pixel
manipulation and digital sound sampling, could open the field of
journalism to a new genre of electronic ethics violations. The author
explores the motivating factors of advocacy journalism, competition,
career advancement, and ego gratification through four fictional case
studies as driving forces toward the questionable use of these new
technologies.
Comment
It is interesting that this article could now be re-written to replace
each of the fictitious case studies with actual ones. This is true not
only for the broadcast industry that the author explores but for the still
photography industry as well. The once clear distinction between form and
substance has indeed been blurred by technology as the author states.
I would have preferred if the author had also included a discussion
within the article on positive influences that might result from these
technologies. It is also important to remember that these are not new
ethical dilemmas, it is just becoming technically easier to trip into the
existing ethical pitfalls. The article is a little hard to read because of
the overabundance of quotes within the text, many of which could have been
paraphrased or left for the "Notes" at the conclusion of the article.
"Ten-Fifty P.I.: Emotion and the Photographer's Role"
Gary Bryant
Summary
This article presents the personal feelings, insights, and techniques
of a newspaper staff photographer who covers spot news events as a regular
part of his job. He discusses the credibility of the media, the perceived
insensitivity of photojournalists at news scenes, the importance of news
photographs as historical documents and teaching tools, and the societal
good that has come the publication of many spot news pictures.
Comment
The value of this article is that it demonstrates how much thought
photojournalists actually give to the ethics of spot news coverage. It
belies the hard core, emotionless image of the news photographer and
demonstrates that a camera is not always an impenetrable emotional shield.
I would argue with the author when he states "I feel that we, the press
and photojournalists, have done a very good job in educating the public
about our job roles and our viewpoint." In most markets this is still not
true. Many newspapers have not developed effective channels of
communication for their readers and the educational role of the newspaper
ombudsman is often not well defined.
"Digital Retouching:
Is There a Place For It In Newspaper Photography?"
Shiela Reaves
Summary
The author attempts to design an early framework for the discussion of
ethical problems brought about by the advent of digital retouching
technology. Representatives from The Register (Santa Anna, CA), The
Chicago Tribune, and USA Today, and three former presidents of the
National Press Photographers Association, Gary Settle, C. Thomas Hardin,
and Rich Clarkson were interviewed for this article.
The subjects agreed that any manipulation of news photographs would be
unethical, but disagreed about using the technology on feature art and
illustration. The article provides a glimpse of how the technology speeds
up the production process and how newspapers are using it effectively
without ethical violations.
Comment
The article is a good general discussion of the technology and
successfully places a number of ethical questions before the reader.
Unfortunately it fails to bring forth specific examples of questionable
use of the technology for discussion by the panel of experts. The author
briefly allows Rich Clarkson to defend the use of the technology to alter
images in National Geographic but fails to solicit opinions from others
about this controversial use of the technology.
The author also fails to adequately define the term feature photograph.
In some cases it refers to photo illustrations and in others to the
traditional definition of found moments. The text is hard to follow
because of the constant intermixing of source people. It would have been
better to let the reader learn the opinion of each expert rather than
space short quotes throughout the article.
I also question the author's conclusion that, "Now anyone in any
department of a newspaper could decide on changes in photographic images
by simply having access to the computer system." This statement is an
oversimplification of the digital retouching process and not a very
realistic scenario.
"Against Photographic Deception"
Edwin Martin
Summary
This interpretive essay explores the subtleties of deception in
photography and photojournalism. The author explores a variety of levels
of viewer interpretation and photographic deception and concludes that any
degree of direction on part of the photographer, when publishing within a
context of expected truth, without a disclaimer, is a clear form of lying.
The essay compares numerous cinematic techniques to the working ethic
of the photojournalist and argues that the symbolic implications of the
photograph depend in part on what it is a photograph of-not simply on how
it looks-and therefore depends on the literal accuracy of the print.
Comment
Although I do not totally agree with the author's strict literal
interpretation of a photograph being dependent on its context or with his
evaluation of the sophistication of the viewer, I do think this is an
excellent article that should be required reading in this day of editorial
illustrations and posed environmental portraiture.
I admire the author's quest for reality, but question whether any
picture can meet his standards. Can a two-dimensional picture ever
accurately convey reality? Can a camera, even with a normal lens, ever
accurately replicate the spatial relationship of object as perceived by
the human brain? Can any one moment captured on film convey to a viewer
how the subject actually felt? I agree that directing is different than
recording but I question whether newspapers should contain cinema verite
freeze frames.
"Private Lives, Public Places: Street Photography Ethics"
A. D. Coleman
Summary
This essay explores the author's personal ethical guidelines for street
photography, which he defines as, "photographs made of people on the
street or in other public places without the consent of the subject." It
discusses the Clarence Arrington photograph by Gianfranco Gorgoni for the
New York Times and relates to a photo opportunity that the author
prevented from occurring.
The essay also explores, through example, the potential misuse and
misrepresentation of stock photographs by publications seeking conceptual
editorial illustrations.
Comment
The author's two examples effectively illustrate his point, but one
involves a picture shot in a hospital, which is certainly not "street
photography" and also not legal without permission and appropriate
releases.
The author concludes by stating, "The assumption that you waive your
rights to control of your image and declare yourself to be free camera
fodder by stepping out of your front door is an arrogance on the part of
photographers; it has no legal basis. The excesses committed in its name
are legion, and extreme." This is a statement that invites further
research in this important ethical area.
"Dying on the Front Page: Kent State and the Pulitzer Prize"
Lesley Wischmann
Summary
This essay by a friend of Jeff Miller, the victim pictured in John
Filo's Pulitzer Prize winning spot news photo from Kent State, is an angry
plea for photojournalists to consider the rights of the victims they
photograph. The essay recalls the pain that this photograph has caused for
the author and why she feels it misrepresents what actually happened. The
author also includes comments from the victim's mother who disagrees with
her opinion.
There is also discussion within the essay of other famous spot news
photos that the author feels misrepresented actual events or that invaded
the privacy of the moment and should not have been taken.
Comment
It is always important to consider the views of the reader,
particularly those present at the scene of such events. It is also
important to read the ethical views, as they relate to photojournalism, of
a non-joumalist, nonacademic author, for it is all too easy to get lost in
the cloak of professionalism.
Many photographs, however, are painful to look at, they are intended to
be. I was very familiar with John Filo's photograph as a student at Ohio
State University during the early 1970s. On May 4, many of my fellow
journalism classmates and I would drive to Kent State to attend annual
memorial services for the victims. That photograph was a meaningful symbol
to us. It did not matter that Mary Vecchio was not a student or that she
did not know the victim. It only mattered that she was a human being
watching another human being who was murdered for what he believed.
I am certain that the pain of the author is real. But in this instance,
I believe that the picture has served a greater good, and should have been
published. The author also notes that the picture was used to advertise a
television special on the shootings at Kent State and suggests that
"exploitative photographs should never be used to advertise a product."
This is an interesting question that deserves further discussion.
"News Photography and the Pornography of Grief"
Jennifer E. Brown
Summary
This article examines a variety of issues that relate to the shooting
and publication of grief photographs. It explores the decision-making
process in determining if a photo is fit to print, the problem of
photographic cliches, the treatment of local versus national and
international news events, the victims' right to grieve privately, the
effect of privacy law on the publication of grief photos, and how such
photos fare in photojournalist competitions.
The author does not draw any specific conclusions on these issues other
than that every day, photographs must be evaluated anew, with
photographers and editors considering the important elements of taste,
privacy, and news value.
Comment
The author attempts to do too much in this overview. The issues are
introduced and sometimes referenced with an applicable quote, but never
discussed in sufficient detail to make a contribution to the existing body
of knowledge.
Over 20 sources are referenced for this six-page study, which makes for
a disjointed and difficult to read article. The author offers no
interpretation of these numerous quotes and fails to state any hypothesis
or conclusions. This report shows a lot of work, especially from an
undergraduate student, but she would have been more successful had she
been advised to choose one area to explore within this broad topic.
"Balancing Good News and Bad News: An Ethical Obligation?"
Mary-Lou Galician and Steve Pastemack
Summary
As the introduction states, "this paper focuses on the ethical and
moral implications of findings from the authors' national survey of
television news directors' policies, practices, and perceptions of
good/bad news."
The four major research areas in this survey are:
1. assessment of various mass media in terms of good news and bad news;
2. assessment of participants' own local television station practices
regarding selection of good news and bad news;
3. whether established policies guide selection and presentation of
good and bad news; and
4. perceptions about balance, newsworthiness, and effects of good news
and bad news on television and whether broadcast journalists have an
ethical obligation in the daily mix of good and bad news.
The paper follows a traditional research format that includes an
introduction, the methodology, findings, and an extensive discussion.
Comment
As the authors note, the 31% return rate limits the generalizability of
the results even though great care was taken to reduce bias within the
sample.
The hypothesis of this study is that the ratio of bad news to good news
on newscasts is greater than the actual societal ratio of such events and
that this raises ethical and moral questions regarding the selection
process. Unfortunately, the study revealed a large group of gatekeepers
who do not consider these categories during the selection process and many
who objected to the categorization of news along a good-bad scale.
The authors dismiss this view as reactive or defensive, but I think it
deserves further study and discussion. I would have liked the authors to
define the terms good and bad as they relate to news within this study. Is
it good news if interest rates fall or does it depend on whether you are a
borrower or an investor. I think we could agree on some events that are
universally good or bad, but that we would also find a large number of
news events that are universally ambiguous.
The question this study begets, which I am not prepared to answer, is
whether researchers should apply quantitative methodologies to qualitative
ethical questions.
"Consumer Magazines and Ethical Guidelines"
Vicki Hesterman
Summary
This study surveyed top-level management at 49 large-circulation
consumer magazines in six areas of potential ethical conflict. The areas
are:
I . freedom to choose editorial content without pressure from the
advertising staff;
2. acceptability of set up photos or composite or fictional characters;
3. acceptability of gifts, tickets, and travel;
4. allowable outside activities for the editorial staff;
5. entering of nonjoumalistic contests; and
6. acceptable means for obtaining a story.
The author notes, based on the survey results, that editors differ
greatly in their interpretation of what is ethical and that "arriving at
any kind of a common code for magazines with different purposes may be
difficult."
Comment
The participants in this survey were promised anonymity. We know that
news magazines were not included in the sample, but otherwise, we do not
know anything about content or demographics, other than a rough estimate
of average circulation. Without this information it is hard to judge the
relevance of the data unless we are willing to assume that a uniform code
of ethics should apply to all large consumer magazines regardless of
content, communication goals, and audience demographics.
The answer to one question, however, should cause some raised eyebrows
among visual communicators. When asked; "Do you ever publish photographs
that are set up without labeling them as photo illustrations?"; only 50%
of the participants answered "No, we only use actual shots." It is hard to
interpret what this really means because that was the only negative
response among the multiple choice answers. There should have been an
answer "no" for people who use illustrations and label them correctly. In
any case, 50% of the respondents use illustrations and do not label them
as illustrations. Whether this is 100% of the publications that use
illustrations as the survey reports or some smaller percentage, it is
still a lot of people abusing the trust of their readers.
Journal of Mass Media Ethics
Vol. 3, No. 2
Fall, 1988
"Ethical Implications of Electronic Still Cameras and Computer Digital
Imaging in the Print Media" Douglas Parker
Summary
The author conducted interviews with 11 photographers, editors, and
educators and complied them to formulate a discussion of ethical issues
photojournalists face with the emergence of electronic still cameras and
digital imaging.
The discussion focuses around five question areas outlined by the
author:
1. Will manipulation of images increase?
2. Will still photographers become disillusioned with their profession
and with editors?
3. Will still photographers have less input into what type of image
appears in the paper?
4. Will the public's trust in newspapers decrease as manipulation of
photos increases?
5. What will be the legal status of images that exist only in
computers?
The article includes an explanation of the technology and discussion
based on controversial examples of its use as well as theoretical areas of
potential ethical conflict.
Comment
This is an excellent discussion by people in the field, many of whom
already have access to the equipment, and have had to make ethical
decisions about the extent to which they would use it.
The author concludes his article with a series of disturbing questions:
"If the leading experts cannot agree on what is or is not ethical, what
constitutes acceptable manipulation or enhancement? How will they be able
to set standards for the next generation when virtually all news gathering
will be done electronically? The experts should draw the battle lines now,
because the future is here . . ."
I believe this is the wrong attitude for our profession to take. The
battle lines were drawn long before digital imaging and long before
electronic still cameras. They were drawn long before the 35mm camera ever
became the tool of the photojournalist. Technology does not create new
ethical issues. The reader does not care if you spend 2 days or 2 minutes
formulating a lie. It is still a lie and still a violation of their trust.
The standards we have set and the issues that we argue will continue to
evolve based on our actions and societal norms. There is no need to return
to the mountain for a new set of commandments.
The Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication is
an international association comprised of educators, universities, and
affiliates. The organization's annual convention is an excellent forum for
the discussion of issues in the field. During the past 20 years, many
papers have dealt with the issue of visual ethics. The following list
includes those papers that were sponsored or cosponsored by the Visual
Communication Division or the Radio-Television Journalism News Division.
More information may be available from the authors or from the
Association's national office at the University of South Carolina. Many
sessions have been recorded and are available on cassette tape.
AE)MC Convention Papers
1972
Research Paper Session Invited Panel 1973
Research Paper Session 1975
Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Research Paper Session 1977
Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Research Paper Session 1978
Research Paper Session Research Paper Session 1979
Open Paper Session Student Paper Session 1980
Research Paper Session Research Paper Session Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Research Paper Session 1981
Mini-plenary Session Research Paper Session Teaching Standards Session 1982
Mini-plenary Session Mini-plenary Session Research Paper Session Research Paper Session Teaching Session 1983
Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Research Paper Session 1984
Research Paper Session 1985
Research Paper Session Teaching Standards Session 1986
Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Professional Freedom and Responsibility Research Paper Session "Visual Excellence and Photographic Professionalism in Local Television
News" Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Research Paper Session 1987
Research Session "Gray Area in the Blue Skies" Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session Research Paper Session "Portraits of a Public Suicide" Professional Freedom and Responsibility Session 1988
Special Topics Session Research Paper Session Mini-plenary Session Invited Panel Mini-plenary Session "Covering the Candidates: Private Lives of Public
People" 1989
Refereed Paper Session Refereed Paper Session Refereed Paper Session 1990
Invited Panel Mini-Plenary Mini-Plenary Invited Paper Session Refereed Paper Session Invited Panel Refereed Paper Session AEJMC also publishes Journalism Quarterly, Journalism Monographs, and
Journalism Educator, which provide a scholarly forum for the publication
of research and teaching articles The following studies are from these
journals:
"The Staged News Photograph and Professional Ethics" This study of the ethics of staged news photos was based on a survey of
photojournalists, managing editors, television newsmen, and a sample of
the upper strata of the public as measured by educational attainment.
Participants were asked to rate the behavior of the photographer in
each of 10 examples (all versions of actual events) as either definitely
unethical, doubtful, or no ethical violation.
The author found the four groups to be in "remarkable agreement" with
the most pronounced agreement occurring at the extremes of the
ethical-unethical continuum. Disagreement was greatest in those situations
that involved hard news and that also were "somewhat complex."
Comment
If everyone who has done research on visual ethics since 1961 had taken
the time to read the introduction of this article, we would have a
stronger foundation of data to build upon. Therefore, I take the space to
quote the first paragraph of the article.
The study of professional ethics in a systematic fashion poses a number
of formidable problems. First, the notion of ethics itself is subjective
and, in a marked degree, dependent upon notions of morals and of law.
Second, the subject impinges heavily upon personal moral values and the
translation of these values into professional conduct, where a number of
additional, and sometimes competing, values are encountered. Third, an
ethic-defined as the rule governing application of personal and social
morals to a professional act-has as its basis the moral values of society,
which in turn, are constantly shifting. Thus, it can be said that, for the
purposes of systematic study, the professional ethic is not independent of
other variables, and must be treated as a manifestation of a rather
complex set of values.
Although the case situations in this study are, hopefully, no longer
applicable, the methodology and philosophy of this research are as sound
today as they were 30 years ago.
Journalism Quarterly Vol. 60, No. 2, Summer 1983
"Ethical Newsgathering Values of the Public and Press Photographers"
Craig H. Hartley
Summary
This comparative study of ethical values is based on results from a
random sample survey of National Press Photographers Association members
who work at publications and people listed in the Austin, TX telephone
directory. Participants were asked to judge 19 hypothetical situations as
either highly ethical, ethical, unethical, or highly unethical.
The study included questions of privacy, decency, faking, dispositions
of negatives in court proceedings, legality versus ethics, acceptance of
freebees, and the presence of photographers affecting news events.
In 17 of the 19 situations presented the difference between the
photojournalists and the public exceeded the .05 significance level set
for the study.
Comment
There are three things that bother me about this study. First, what is
the difference between ethical and highly ethical or unethical and highly
unethical? Second, some of the situations lack specific details that I
think would effect the response of the participants. For example,
situation 15 states, "Photographer ruins one of two remaining frames of
film in another photographer's camera." What was the reason for this
bizarre occurrence and how did it occur? And situation 18 states,
"Photographer decides not to photograph hobo killed by train, despite
being sent out to do this task." Did the photographer feel that the scene
was too gruesome or that it wasn't newsworthy? His reason for this action
would be important to know. Third, the author states in his interpretation
of results that, "Many (photographers) shifted responsibility for their
actions to the editor by saying they had a job to do, or it was the
editor's decision. This is not valid reasoning." At many papers this is
very valid reasoning if the photographer desires to keep his or her job.
It may not be ideal, but it is reality.
Although 17 of the 19 cases showed a statistically significant
difference among the two groups of respondents, it is important to realize
that about half of these differences occurred on the same side of the axis
and were merely a difference in the degree of ethical or unethical
behavior that the respondents perceived. The author would have been well
served by reviewing the Wilcox study prior to re-inventing the wheel.
TEXTBOOKS
An important vehicle for educating students about visual ethics is the
college textbook. The following list includes many of the textbooks used
in visual communication survey courses and beginning photojournalism
courses at accredited schools of journalism and technical schools around
the country.
Photojournalism, The Visual Approach Chapter 20, entitled "Ethics," provides the best coverage of
photojournalism ethics among the textbooks that were examined. It includes
visual and written examples and a discussion of the photographer's and
editor's viewpoints.
I do disagree with Hoy's definition of the "cornerstone of journalism
ethics," within the text and question whether we, as educators, should
teach ethics to students with the degree of certainty that the following
selection implies.
The photojournalist's role on the scene is dictated by the cornerstone
of photojournalistic ethics-to get the picture despite any obstacles.
In general, it is not the photojournalist's job to decide whether to
photograph or not. He or she is just too close to the drama and tragedy to
know whether the photograph is in bad taste or is in reality an important
news story that the public should know about. . . . Later the editor (or
the publication's attomeys, if need be) can decide on whether the photo is
invasion of privacy, libel, or even 'in good taste.'
Yet, often the first thought of the beginning photojournalist-and
rightfully so-is to sympathize with the subject and to decide not to
photograph. But the responsibility is clear-if it is news, a
photojournalist has the obligation to report it regardless of personal
reaction. Here the old adage 'shoot first and question afterwards' is a
good policy.
I am aware that this is the policy at many newspapers, but there has
been sufficient argument over its merits to question whether it should be
stated as an accepted policy throughout the field to photojournalism
students.
Photojournalism: The Professionals' Approach Chapter 13 is entitled, "Photographing Within The Bounds of Laws and
Ethics," but deals almost entirely with the legal considerations of
privacy, libel, the courts, and copyright. The brief section of the
chapter that discusses ethics is good, and will be updated and expanded in
a new edition.
Photojournalism There may, at some time, be an updated version of this book. Amphoto
had planned publication in 1986 and again in 1987, but both were canceled.
There is a 1983 printing, which is also listed as the fourth edition.
The last chapter, entitled "Privileges and Restrictions" gives a very
brief and general overview of the topic area.
Exploring Black & White Photography The last chapter in this book, entitled "Ethical and Legal Aspects," is
only three pages long and does not cover ethical considerations of
photojournalists.
Handbook of Photography Chapter 11 is titled, "Photography, Ethics and Law," but deals almost
entirely with the legal aspects of privacy, libel, copyright, and
ownership.
Photojournalism: Making Pictures for Publication This book, which is out of print, does not contain any specific
discussion of ethics and there is no listing for ethics in the index.
Photojournalism, Photography With A Purpose Chapter 11, entitled "Business Skills, Legal Aspects and Community
Relations," discusses libel, invasion of privacy, model releases,
photographing money, and documents and the copyright law, but does not
discuss applicable ethical considerations.
Photojournalism, Principles and Practices Chapter 17 is entitled "A Matter of Ethics" and provides a
philosophical discussion of the topic but does not include case studies or
examples of pictures that have caused debate within the field.
There are two books that I am aware of that are dedicated to the topic
of visual ethics. One is New Pictures Fit to Print ... or are They ? by
Curtis D. MacDougall and the other is Image Ethics, The Moral Rights of
Subjects in Photographs, Film, and Television, edited by Larry Gross, John
Stuart Katz, and Jay Ruby.
MacDougall's book was published by Journalistic Services, Inc. in 1971.
It is a shockingly honest discussion of ethical considerations in news
photography. This book is an excellent historical reference, based
entirely on case studies. There is commentary from many of the journalists
who took the pictures and were involved in the picture editing and
publication decisions. It is valuable to know from whence we came and it
is all here-lynchings, disasters, Lindbergh, and wars. I recommend
checking the library or used book stores if you are not familiar with this
book.
Image Ethics, from Oxford University Press, 1988, provides a much more
theoretical approach to the issue of ethics and also includes an excellent
annotated bibliography. Most of this book deals with film, but the issues
are easily paralleled in television and still photography. Most of the
chapters confront the moral responsibility of preconceived visual
representation, but public photography and documentary film-making are
also discussed.
As you might expect from a compilation, this book wanders amidst the
amorphous realm of moral convictions. Some of the chapters leave the
reader feeling that artistic license supersedes moral responsibility,
while others share with the reader the deepest sense of ethical
consideration.
Most of this book does not directly relate to the situations that most
broadcast news and publication photographers encounter on a daily basis,
but the philosophical discussions are relevant and provide a good
foundation for further research.
Photojournalism An Ethical Approach
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Rich
Beckman
University of North Carolina
Presiding: Lorry E. Rytting, University of
Utah
"Ethical Judgments About Selected Photojournalism
Situations"
Fred Parrish, University of Florida
"Government Pressures on Reporters and
Editors"
Presiding: John Rider, Southern
Illinois-Edwardsville
Panel: Roy M. Fisher, University of
Missouri
Theodore F. Koop, Radio, Television News Directors
Association
George Reedy, Marquette University
Presiding: James Hoyt, University of
Wisconsin
"Judging People in the News-Unconsciously: The Effects of
Varying Camera Angles and Bodily Activity for Visuals"
Lee M. Mandell
and Donald L. Shaw, University of North Carolina
Presiding: Stephen
Lamoreux, Colorado State University
"Professionalism in
Photojournalism"
Perry Riddle, Chicago Daily News
Presiding: Stephen Lamoreux, Colorado State
University
"Reader and Audience Reaction to Photos"
Robert E. Gilka,
National Geographic Society
Presiding: Perry
Riddle, Chicago Daily News
"Press Responsibility: The News
Photographer's Concern"
Sandra Eisert, Washington Post
Presiding: James Fosdick, University of
Wisconsin-Madison
"The Questionable Photographic: A Study of J-School
Students as Gatekeepers"
William Baxter and Rebecca Quarles, University
of Georgia
"Women in Photojournalism: A Survey and Professionalization
Comparison"
Karen Slattery, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Presiding: William Baxter, University of
Georgia
"Street Photography from the Subject's Viewpoint"
Emily
Nottingham, Indiana University
Presiding: Dan Drew, University of
Wisconsin-Madison
"Television and Terrorism: Professionalism Not Quite
the Answer"
Herbert Terry, Indiana University
James Fosdick, Presiding
"The Prying Eye:
Ethics of Photojournalism"
Whitney R. Mundt and Joseph Broussard,
Louisiana State University
Presiding: I. Wilmer Counts, Indiana
University
"Farm Security Administration Photography: Propaganda or
Documentary?"
Fred Stanfield, University of Georgia
Presiding: Karin Ohm, University of Iowa
"The Editor's Manipulation of Photographs: An Experimental Study of
the Effects of Varying Production Methods"
James Fosdick and Pam
Shoemaker, University of Wisconsin-Madison
"Ethical Issues for
Photojournalists: A Comparative Study of the Perspectives of Journalism
Students and Law Students"
Mary Remole and James Brown, University of
Minnesota
Discussant: C. Zoe Smith, Marquette University
Presiding: John C. Doolittle, Indiana
University
"Broadcast Executives' Attitudes Toward Fairness, Equal
Time, Ascertainment, and Communications Act Revision"
James R. Smith,
SUNY-New Paltz
Presiding: Bill
Thom, Marquette University
"The Professional Perspective of a Two-Time
Pulitzer Prize Photographer"
Stanley Forman, Boston Herald American
Presiding: Rich Beckman, University of North
Carolina-Chapel Hill
"A Crisis for Photographers: Clinton, Tennessee,
1956"
June Adamson, University of Tennessee
Discussant: James
Fosdick, University of Wisconsin-Madison,p> Joint Session
Presiding:
Charlene Brown, Indiana University
"The Right of Privacy vs. The Right
to Gather News: Access to Records and Places"
Panelists: Aryeh Neier,
NYU, Formerly, ACLU
Dwight L. Teeter, University of
Texas-Austin
Michael Gartner, Des Moines Register and Tribune
"Photographers' Access to News Events and the
Courts"
Moderator: Rich Beckman, University of North Carolina-Chapel
Hill
Panelists: Don Middlebrooks, Steel, Hector and Davis, Miami,
FL
William 0. Seymour, NPPA and University of West Virginia
Johannes
F. Spreen, Sheriff, Oakland County
Presiding: C. Zoe Smith, Marquette
University
"Changing in the Wording of Cutlines Fail to Reduce
Photographs' Offensiveness"
Fred Fedler and Paul Hightower, University
of Central Florida, and Tim Counts, University of South Florida
"Broadcast News Course Content:
Techniques, Issues and Ethics"
James R. Smith, SUNY-New Paltz
"Media Ethics in Hostage
Situations"
Presiding: Sarah Toppins, University of
Illinois
Speaker: T. Joseph Scanlon, Carleton
"Ethical and Legal Issues in Visual
Communications"
Presiding: Carolyn Cline, University of
Texas-Austin
Speakers: Sandra Eisert, San Jose Mercury News
Michael
Kautsch, University of Kansas
Lorraine Reed, Council of Better Business
Bureaus
"Viewer Response to Contrivance in
Joumalistic Photography"
Michael Diehl, University of Texas-Austin
Presiding: James A. Wollert, Memphis State
University
"The Use of Anonymous Sources and Related Ethical Concerns
in Journalism"
K. Tim Wulfemeyer, University of Hawaii-Manoa
"The
Real-Life Referent as a Standard for News Perspective Bias"
Gretchen S.
Barbatsis, Michigan State University
"Teaching Students Ethics"
Presiding: Karin Ohm,
University of Iowa
Speakers: Sandra Eisert, San Jose Mercury
News
Will Counts, Indiana University
"Legal and Ethical
Considerations Concerning the Coverage of Mt. St. Helens and Other
Tragedies"
Presiding: C. Zoe Smith, Marquette University
Speakers:
George Wedding, San Jose Mercury News
Steve Small, The Columbian
"Newspaper Subscribers' Responses to Accident
Photos: The Acceptance Level Compared to Demographics, Death Anxiety, Fear
of Death and State Anxiety"
James M. Roche, Indiana University
Moderator: K. Tim Wulfemeyer, University of
Hawaii-Manoa
"Factors of Believability of Television
Newscasters"
Discussant: Tony Atwater, Michigan State University
Moderator: Ken Kobre, University of
Missouri-Columbia
"Photojournalism and the Infliction of Emotional
Distress"
Michael Sherer, University of Nebraska
"Photography and
Reality: A Matter of Ethics"
Julianne Newton, University of
Texas-Austin
"Ethics in Photojournalism"
Tom
Defayo, The Commercial Appeal, Memphis, TN
"Ethics in Broadcast
Journalism: Myths, Realities, Ideals"
Moderator: Donald McBride, South
Dakota State University
Panelists: Doug Fox, WFAA-TV, Dallas, TX
Tim
Wulfemeyer, University of Hawaii-Manoa.
Bill Overman, KFDX-TV, Wichita
Falls, TX
Paula Walker, KOTV, Tulsa, OK
"Ethics in Broadcast
Journalism: Deciding What's Right"
Moderator: John Broholm, University
of Kansas
"TV News Directors and Photographers: Matters
Professional"
Moderator: Dwight Jenson, Syracuse University
Conrad Smith and Tom Hubbard, Ohio State
University
"Television News Directors' Attitudes toward 'Good News' and
'Bad News': A National Survey"
Mary-Lou Galician, Arizona State
University and Steve Pastemack, New Mexico State University
"The
Changing Profiles of Broadcast News Directors"
Vernon A. Stone,
Southern Illinois University
Discussants: Tim Wulfemeyer, University of
Hawaii-Manoa.
John C. Doolittle, American University
Sandra H.
Dickson, University of West Florida
"The Electronic
Darkroom-Will It Digitize Ethics?"
Craig L. Denton, University of Utah
Moderator: Craig Denton, University of
Utah
"Images of Democracy: An Analysis of Photos Published During and
After Argentine Military Rule"
Jeffrey A. John, Wright State
University
Discussant: Ed Scheiner, Michigan State University
"Broadcast News-Issues and Ethics"
Presiding:
John Doolittle, American University
Craig Mitchell Allen, Ohio
University
Discussant: Max Ustler, University of Kansas
"R. Budd
Dwyer: A Case Study in Newsroom Decision Making"
Patrick R. Parsons and
William Smith, Pennsylvania State University
Discussant: Mark D.
Hannon, Xavier College
"The Ferraro Financial Furor: How the Television
Networks Covered It"
Jeanne M. Norton and Luther W. Sanders, University
of Arkansas-Little Rock
Discussant: Tony Atwater, Michigan State
University
"Ethics in Broadcast
Journalism"
Presiding: Sarah Toppins, American University
Panel:
John Spain, WBRZ-TV, Baton Rouge, LA
Ernie Schultz, Radio-Television
News Directors Association
Tim Wulfemeyer, San Diego State University
"Clones, Codes and Conflicts of Interest in
Cartooning: Cartoonists and Editors Look at Ethics"
Presiding: Doug
Covert, University of Evansville
Speakers: Daniel Rife, University of
Alabama
Donald Sneed, San Diego State University
Roger Van Ommeren,
South Dakota State University
Robert L. Baker, Pennsylvania State
University
Discussant: Tom Hubbard, Ohio State University
Invited Panel:
"Responsibility and Field Work Procedures in Documentary
Photography"
Presiding: J. B. Colson, University of
Texas-Austin
"Community Documentation"
Michael Short, Documentary
Photographer, Tarascan Indians, Mexico
"A Mainstream Small Town in
Northern Mexico"
Julie Newton, University of
Texas-Austin
"Transitions in Cowboy and Oil Cultures in West
Texas"
Rick Williams, Documentary Photographer, Albany, TX
"The Teaching of Photojournalism
Ethics"
Paul Lester, University of Central Florida
Discussant: Rich
Beckman, University of North Carolina
"Ideology and Press Photographs: A Framework
for Analysis"
Keith Kenney, Michigan State University
"Gender
Stereotypes in Sports Photographs"
Wayne Wanta and Dawn Legett,
University of Texas-Austin
"Native Americans and the Press: Accurate
Coverage or Stereotype?"
Presiding: Sharon Murphy, Marquette
University
Speakers: Frank Blythe, Native American Public Broadcasting
Consortium, Lincoln, NE
Richard LaCourse, LaCourse Communications,
Yakima, WA
Mark Trahant, The Arizona Republic, Phoenix, AZ
Armstrong
Wiggins, Indian Law Resource Center, Washington, DC
"After Dwyer: Sensitivity in News Photography, a Year
Later"
Presiding: Robert L. Baker, Pennsylvania State
University
Speakers: James Vesely, Sacramento Union, and former
chairman, APME Photojournalism Committee
John Hall, The Oregonian
Presiding: William L. Winter, American Press Institute
Panel: John Jacobs, San Francisco Examiner
Rollin Post, KRON-TV,
San Francisco
Michael Traugott, The Gallop Organization and the
University of Michigan
Presiding: Sandra Utt, Memphis State
University
"Still-Video Photography: Tomorrow's Electronic Cameras in
the Hands of Today's Photojournalists"
Kurt Foss and Robert Kahan,
University of Missouri
Presiding: Judith M. Buddenbaum, Colorado
State University
"Digital Imaging Technology is More Than Meets the
Eye: The Promise and Perils of Easy Manipulation of News Photos"
Danal
Terry and Dominic L. Lasorsa, University of Texas-Austin
Presiding: Tony Rimmer, California State
University-Fullerton
"What's Ethical and What's Not in Electronic
Journalism: Perceptions of News Directors"
K. Tim Wulfemeyer, San Diego
State University
Discussant: James D. Harless, Ohio State University
Presiding: Michael Murrie, Southern
Illinois-Carbondale
"Who Owns the Pictures?"
Tom Bier, Chairman,
Radio Television News Directors Association
Tom Bitney, Manager, News
Graphics, Minneapolis Star-Tribune
Steve Blum, CONUS Communications,
Minneapolis
Steve Murphy, News Director, WOWT-TV, Omaha, NE
Moderator: Nancy Green, president/publisher,
Springfield News-Leader
"When Hell Breaks Loose-Crises We All
Share"
Nancy Sharp, Fiona Chew, Joan Deppa, Lynne Flocke, Dona Hayes,
Frances Plude and Maria Russell, Syracuse University
Marion Lowenstein,
Stanford University
Elizabeth Dickey, University of South Carolina
Moderator: Roy Flukinger, University of
Texas-Austin
"Journalism Ethics: Up Against the Berlin
Wall"
Karen-Annette Franz, University of Minnesota
Theodore Glasser,
Stanford University
Carolyn Wakeman, University of California,
Berkeley
James Ridgeway, The Village Voice
Alec Miran, Executive
Director of Special Events, CNN
Moderator: Roy L. Moore, University of
Kentucky
"Ethics and Law: Who Draws the Line Where?"
"Digital
Manipulation of Electronic Photography: How Far is Too Far?"
Howard
Bossen, Michigan State University
"Legal Issues in Electronic
Alteration of Photographics"
Michael D. Sherer, University of
Nebraska-Omaha
Moderator: Jim McNay, San Jose State
University
"Analysis of Visual Reference Associations in Television
News Coverage of the 1988 Presidential Campaign"
Jeffrey John, Wright
State
"Television News Re-enactments: Setting the Stage for the
Computer Manipulation of Journalism's Moving Images"
Don Tomlinson,
Texas A&M University
Discussant: Doug Carr St Bonaventure,p>
Invited Panel
Moderator: Stanley Wearden, Kent State
University
"Teaching Resources for Ethics Classes"
Rich Beckman,
University of North Carolina
Vicki Hesterman, Point Loma
Nazarene
Ralph Izard, Ohio University
Bob Steele, Poynter Institute
Moderator: Ted Hartwell, Minneapolis Institute of
Art
"The Arts, the Media and the Public Interest: Robert Mapplethorpe
and Related Issues"
Roy Flukinger, University of Texas-Austin
Diane
Helleckson, St. Paul Pioneer Press
Moderator: Jim McNay, San Jose State
"A
Method for Studying Bias and Ideology in Journalistic
Photographs"
Keith Kenney, University of South Carolina
Discussant:
Frank Biocca University of North Carolina
Walter
Wilcox
Summary
Frank P. Hoy
Prentice-Hall,
1986
Kenneth Kobre
Curtin & London, 1980
Arthur Rothstein
Amphoto, 4th Edition, 1979
Arnold Gassan
Wm. C.
Brown, 1989
Ronald P. Lovell, Fred C. Zwahlen, Jr., and
James A. Folts
Delmar Publishers, 1987, Second Edition
Philip C. Geraci
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 1978, Second Edition
Robert L. Kerns
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1980
Clifton C. Edom
Wm. C.
Brown Company, 1980, 2nd Edition