THE ETHICS OF AESTHETICS
Exercise 4.7
To print or not to print…
Read Claire Cozens’ Guardian article about Guerrero’s photograph: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2004/mar/12/pressandpublishing.spain
- What would you have done had you been the editor of a British broadsheet newspaper?
- A similar case revolving around a photograph of a dead Iraqi soldier in the Gulf War prompted Michael Ignatieff, the author of Magnum Degrees, to write and reflect on the ethics of photojournalism. Read ‘But Should You Print It?’ Core resources: ShouldYouPrint.pdf (Open College of the Arts, 2014:89)
My response
Cozen’s article was a response to the various ways that a media photograph, by photographer Guerrero, for a Spanish newspaper of the Madrid train bombing was published; the controversy was about a severed limb which appeared in the original image. The British newspapers airbrushed, replaced with background stones or disguised it by bleeding the colour out; the Spanish newspaper published the image as taken.
Reuters say that they don’t like removals from photographs or anything that changes the editorial content. The Telegraph’s picture editor said it was a question of taste, removing the body part didn’t change the context and it didn’t add anything to the picture.
Michael Ignatieff in his paper “But Should You Print It?, mentions four areas of sensitivity:
- Faking: the manipulation, which can’t be detected.
- Decency: which is declining
- Privacy: whether it’s is a public occasion seems to be the crux of this
- Violence: would the presence of the camera invite violence?
Ignatief suggests we ask 4 questions and that 1 of them must be affirmed:
- Is the event of such significance that the shock is worth it?
- Is the objectionable detail necessary for a proper understanding of the event?
- Does the subject freely consent?
- Does the image express humanity?
He points out that despite all the wars we have seen and experienced “popular culture is still largely imbued with a romantic conception of war and resents a grimmer reality” (Ignatieff,nd).
The code of ethics (National Press Photographers Association, 2017) states that “our primary role is to report visually on the significant event and varied viewpoints in our common world….the faithful and comprehensive depiction of the subject at hand”. In the detail it states that images should be accurate, unmanipulated, have context and shot with respect.
Having reflected on this my response would be to print the photograph I its entirety; as if you begin to manipulate images even to be sensitive, where do you draw the line; how much manipulation is ethical/correct? However from what I read in Cozen’s article it seems that the experience of the British papers is such that there would have been many complaints if the severed limb had been evident; as a British Newspaper I guess I would have stayed with the rest of the pack.
References:
Cozens, C. (2004) ‘Editors ‘clean up’ bomb photo’ In: The Guardian 12/03/2004 At: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/mar/12/pressandpublishing.spain (Accessed 10/01/2021).
Ignatieff, M. (s.d.) ‘But Should You Print It?’ At: https://www.oca-student.com/sites/default/files/oca-content/key-resources/res-files/shouldyouprint.pdf
National Press Photographers Association (2017) Code of Ethics. At: https://nppa.org/code-ethics (Accessed 10/01/2021).
Open College of the Arts (2014) Photography 2: Documentary-Fact and Fiction (Course Manual). Barnsley: Open College of the Arts.
Photography 2: Documentary 