Photojournalism – Crisis In Confidence
A really good opinion piece from David D. Perlmutter, a Professor and Associate Dean for Graduate Studies & Research at the University of Kansas School of Journalism & Mass Communications, appears in Editor and Publisher. He discusses the recently revealed falsification of photographs uncovered by bloggers. He sees a serious crisis that the media must address soon.
In each case, these bloggers have engaged in the kind of probing, contextual, fact-based (if occasionally speculative) media criticism I have always asked of my students. And the results have been devastating: news photos and video shown to be miscaptioned, radically altered, or staged (and worse, re-staged) for the camera. Surely “green helmet guy,” “double smoke,” “the missiles that were actually flares,” “the wedding mannequin from nowhere,” the “magical burning Koran,” the “little girl who actually fell off a swing” and “keep filming!” will now enter the pantheon of shame of photojournalism.
A few photo-illusions are probably due to the lust for the most sensational or striking-looking image—that is, more aesthetic bias than political prejudice. Also, many photographers know that war victims are money shots and some will break the rules of the profession to cash in. But true as well is that local stringers and visiting anchors alike seem to have succumbed either to lens-enabled Stockholm syndrome or accepted being the uncredited Hezbollah staff photographer so as to be able to file stories and images in militia-controlled areas.
It does not help that certain news organizations have acted like government officials or corporate officers trying to squash a scandal. The visual historian in me revolts when an ABC producer informs me that Reuters “deleted all 920 images” by the stringer who produced the “Beirut double smoke” image and is “less than willing to talk about it.” Can you say “18-minute gap,” anyone?
He is quite harsh on the media's response to date and strongly recommends they take action at once to correct the situation.
The second, much more painful option, is to implement your ideals, the ones we still teach in journalism school. Admit mistakes right away. Correct them with as much fanfare and surface area as you devoted to the original image. Create task forces and investigating panels. Don’t delete archives but publish them along with detailed descriptions of what went wrong. Attend to your critics and diversify the sources of imagery, or better yet be brave enough to refuse to show any images of scenes in which you are being told what to show. I would even love to see special inserts or mini-documentaries on how to spot photo bias or photo fakery—in other words, be as transparent, unarrogant, and responsive as you expect those you cover to be.
The stakes are high. Democracy is based on the premise that it is acceptable for people to believe that some politicians or news media are lying to them; democracy collapses when the public believes that everybody in government and the press is lying to them.
A bleak assessment, indeed, but one that is likely quite true.
Other Links to this Post
-
The Real Ugly American.com » Blog Archive » Bloggers Get Their Due — August 18, 2006 @ 10:13 pm
-
Blue Crab Boulevard » Blog Archive » Allah Pundit Gets Cranky — August 23, 2006 @ 3:02 pm
-
Blue Crab Boulevard » Blog Archive » Images Matter - Honest Images Matter Most — August 26, 2006 @ 7:20 am
By Black Jack, August 18, 2006 @ 7:26 pm
Pearlmutter sees the problems as they have been recently revealed in his field of photojournalism, but he doesn’t seem to grasp the broader implications for professional journalism as a whole. The examples of dishonesty he cites do not occur in a vacuum. They are part of a larger fraud which infects the entire body of American journalism.
I applaud Pearlmutter for his courage and professionalism, but unfortunately, the problems he’s concerned about are only the tip of the iceberg. For a good introduction to the larger issues, Professor Pearlmutter should read Bernard Goldberg’s books, Bias, and Arrogance.
By David Paulin, August 19, 2006 @ 1:02 am
David Perlmutter puts too little emphasis on one of the main reasons for journalistic atrocities such as “Reutersgate†– the mainstream media’s heavy reliance on “local hires†in its foreign reporting and photojournalism.
Stringers and freelancers are far more likely than staffers to have questionable training and loyalties. And because they’re chasing a paycheck with every assignment or photo, there’s a built-in incentive to cheat. Cheating is much easier to do abroad than when working in the states. There’s simply less accountability in foreign reporting — especially with the economic model that sustains the MSM’s outsourcing model.
Yet another problem is editors with a particular political agenda which they make known. Freelancers are more likely than staffers to satisfy such biases in whatever way they can. Biased editors, moreover, are less inclined to question articles, quotes, and photos that confirm their biases.
Perlmutter, ironically, calls this “the golden age of photojournalistic ethics†and refers to abundant ethical lapses in previous eras. It appears those days are over, however, given the level of accountability provided by the blogesphere. Whether the mainstream media catches onto this is another question.
By fiona, August 19, 2006 @ 9:10 am
Worse yet – the entire business model of photo journalism and video journalism is based on the profit making center of supplying Arab media with what it wants. This part of the business for APTN and Reuters makes more money for the organization (given that it includes commentary and “slant”) than does the part that supplies minimal commentary in the form of a caption and date stamp to the Western media. So the emphasis has to be on what is acceptable to the profitable side of the enterprise that can also be used for the remainder.
Add to that the CNN “sadam” thesis (if we make the truth public, these folks will cut off our access) and the tendency of the Islamists to keep track of reporters quite visibly and to threaten them and you have a perfect storm of confidence in the West.
By perlmutter, August 19, 2006 @ 11:31 pm
Hi Everybody: This is me, Perlmutter. I just finished a book on political blogs and I have to stick to my ideal that blogs have opened up a marketplace of ideas that, no matter how messy it is in execution, makes Democracy richer. So fire away! I do want to say one thing to the commenters: There is media bias out there, a lot of it. (I have read those books; read my books and essays and you’ll see I have also written books on news bias!). But don’t shoot all the messengers. There are decent photojournalists out there, trying to do their best to get the facts right and fair. But the industry is so skewed toward the bang bang shot stripped of all context that it’s hard to work within the system.
By the way, there are two terrific books on the subject of photo-manipulation. The second is written by a former CIA photoexpert. Very enjoyable reads as well.
Jaubert, Alain. (1989[1986]). Making People Disappear: An Amazing Chronicle of Photographic Deception.Washnigton: Pergamon-Brassey’s.
Brugioni, Dino A. 1999. Photo fakery: The history and techniques of photographic deception and manipulation. Dulles, VA: Brassey’s.
By Black Jack, August 21, 2006 @ 12:56 pm
Perlmutter, I read your Chronicle article, and I’ll have a look at the essays on your web site. I bookmarked it. You strike me as a straightforward guy with a sincere interest in the integrity of journalism.
Blogs can not only make Democracy richer, they can make professional journalism richer and more accurate. But, you know that. Best Regards.