When lunacy reigns supreme...

“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”
~ H.L. Mencken

 

You don't.

In many cases, the point of a photo is overtly not to show an "accurate" picture of what was before the sensor. Photographers throughout history have made photos to show a particular perspective, to express themselves, to tell emotional truths that don’t necessarily rely on what an accurate representation can tell.

I advocate healthy skepticism when it comes to photos that claim accuracy. I think it's important to take into consideration the history and reputation of the source in those cases.

And I advocate photographers continue to message, communicate, and express personal points of view, using photography's full potential as an artistic and communicative medium beyond its ability to be representationally accurate.

I try to take responsibility for my viewing habits. I don't believe everything I see in a photo and I don't care about accuracy when it doesn't seem relevant to the message or import of the photo.

"Art is a lie that tells the truth." —Picasso

I try to keep straight the kind of photo I'm looking at. And I always check second and third sources to verify, though that can be difficult at times and, especially today, many sources simply piggyback on other sources without concern for verification.

Buyer beware!