Should a photojournalists ethics be absolute or situational? A photojournalist ethics should always be absolute unless its for something that is fun or get premishion to make it situational. Because in cases such as 9/11 with that photo with the man on the building looking lika an airplain about to hit is VERY unethical due to the viewers involved in the tragedy and are affected by something so Tragic. But somehthing not unethical is like taking pimpls of a models face or croping a picture..
Can a photo really capture truth? Yes a picture CAN really catpure the truth but only if the person behind the lense is willing to fallow the rules of ABSOLUTE!.. It is t his way because its something being captured at that very point and moment of time unless of course the photo was photo shoped and edited out or in images.
decisions have you made as a photographer that "edit" reality? I took a picture of a student her at school that had many dark spots on his face and had alot of scratches all over the photo.. i croped and edited out all the dark spots and all the scratches that i could find.
Why is it important that news organizations have clearly defined ethical standards? Because the news organizations viewers EXPECT THE TRUTH! not False FACTS.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment