josh_penfold

I have been following these instances of journalistic ethics for a while and as a

photojournalist and a PhD student in Media have some concerns. While agree there

should be a standard of truth in photojournalism, I feel this whole situation is far

overblown. The whole industry is trying to maintain the truth in the photos being shown

by avoiding doctoring, even just by color manipulation. My concern is that while there is

currently heated debate on photos being manipulated, there is less debate about the

actual stories being written. While researching and writing my dissertation on bias in

the media, relating towards politics, i have come to the conclusion, that unbiased

reporting is almost impossible. Whether it be the reporters writing the piece, the editor

choosing which is deemed "newsworthy", there is influence over the information and the

subsequent viewership by the public. You can not deny that the main goal of any

Newspaper, Television Network or other commercial media outlet is to bring value/profit

to its owners.

Looking at the recent events in Virginia, they are tragic yes, but what is the reason that

network news covered the event in such lengths. The event affected many throughout

the nation, but this was not the reason for the coverage. The media as a whole has a way

of taking an event either unexpected like a Hurricane, or tragic like the Virginia Tech

shootings, and make it into a media event. Extensive media coverage of an event like

this not only reports on the events that transpired but provides a platform for further

discussion on related political and social concerns that ignite further media events. While

networks and newspaperes serve a purpose in providing information to the masses they

are far from unbiased and can seldom be called objective. If you look back throughout

the history of journalism in the US, in the early 1800's many publications were partisan,

and there was no pretense of objectivity in reporting on events that were of benefit or

detriment to their cause. This notion of objective unbiased reporting has only pervaded

the public sphere since the proliferation of corporate owned media.

If the media can take a high road and avoid scandalizing events, and using them to

entice viewership, objective reporting would be closer to a reality, but a true objective

unbiased media is likely to be an impossibility.

As a student of the media and working in the industry, I believe that doctoring photos

to improve their asthetic should be allowable while doctoring photos to change their

newsworthyness is not. If these photographers were fired for "doctoring" an image an

changing the "truth" then many, many photographers should be fired for asking someone

to look at a camera and smile, talking to the subject of for that matter interacting with

environment itself. For once a photojournalist interacts with the public in an environment

they become a participant, and cannot and should not portray themselves as a mere

observer .

I believe the public is aware the media plays an active role in events that transpire, and use

the fact an event is covered and adjust their behaviour accordingly. If in all my studies I

have learned one thing, it is that the media, whether it media broadcast, print or web,

should accept the fact that they are participants in events they cover and do the public a

service and make them aware that media is not an "official" outlet of any type of

information and merely a conduit to ideas, opinion and mediated facts.