Fake photos

by Abbie Goldring
​The only appropriate time for Hi’s Eye to publish a fake photo would be in the April Fool’s issue. Otherwise, forget it; manipulating photographs is unethical and deceiving. But surprisingly, many newspapers are guilty of this journalistic crime and turn the advantages of Photoshop into disadvantages.

Commentary

​Just a few weeks ago, an Orthodox Jewish newspaper called Der Tzitung published a photo released by the White House of President Barack Obama and his national security team watching a live feed of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound. While the original photo contained Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the published version did not. According to thestar.com, Clinton and another female White House official were removed from the photo because the newspaper’s religious beliefs prevent the publication of women in photos.

Though there was no harm intended, this action can be seen as discriminatory. Women in the United States have fought hard for their rights, as have many other groups. By eliminating the presence of one type of person in a photo, the gains of civil rights movements seem as if they are reversing. Were it not for the disclosure of this alteration, readers would be unaware that such a notable woman was there to witness a significant historical event.

Furthermore, manipulated photos cause people to draw false conclusions. Amid the controversy surrounding the publication of photos of Bin Laden’s dead body, an image put up on the Internet in 2009 resurfaced and was published on various newspapers’ websites, such as those of the British newspapers The Daily Mail and The Daily Mirror, according to nypost.com. The image showed a bloodied and battered Bin Laden that was discovered to be a combination of Bin Laden’s and an unknown man’s face.

The White House intentionally decided to keep the real photos secret because of their graphic content, but citizens who saw the fake photo were likely to believe it was the real one. This photo could lead to false interpretations about the way the events unfolded, which would then be altering history.

But rewriting history is reserved for fiction, not for journalists that are responsible for truthfully informing the public of world events. If changing the news is unethical, then what makes changing a photo okay?