The Burden of Visual Truth:
The Role of Photojournalism in Mediating Reality
Julianne H. Newton
Assistant Professor and Head, Photojournalism
Department of Journalism, CMA 6.144
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712
512.471.1976
Submitted for presentation to the Visual Communication Division,
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington,
D.C., August 1995
_1995 Julianne H. Newton
The Burden of Visual Truth:
The Role of Photojournalism in Mediating Reality
ABSTRACT
This paper presents results of an ethnographic study of photojournalism
practice at nine newspapers ranging from small-town to metropolitan
dailies. The study examined photojournalism in the context of frame
analysis, social construction of reality theory and visual perception
theory. Results suggest that although photojournalists acknowledge
the
subjective nature of their vision, they, their editors, their
subjects
and even their viewers are still using news images as if reporting
objective reality is possible. The author concludes that new
technologies are leading photojournalism toward stricter ethical
standards, which ultimately may further empower photojournalism as one
of few remaining conveyors of reasonably true news.
The Burden of Visual Truth:
The Role of Photojournalism in Mediating Reality
The nineteenth century began by believing that what was reasonable was
true and it wound up believing that what it saw a photograph of
was
true--from the finish of a horse race to the nebulae in the sky
(Ivins,
1978).
The twentieth century began by believing that what it saw a photograph
of was true and wound up by knowing, at least on a cognitive level,
that
many things that seemed to be visually true were not. Yet
photojournalists still rely on the idea that somewhere deep inside
the
human creature is the basic belief that what one sees with one's own
eyes is true
--and that viewing a photograph is the next best thing to being there.
Can it be that in spite of all we know about media manipulations in
advertising, entertainment--and even news--that we still believe what
we
see, and that's why the media are so effective?
Many photojournalists will agree that they can and sometimes (perhaps
even often) do manipulate their subjects and, therefore, reality
(Reaves, 1993; Brink, 1988). However, this study is based on the
hypothesis that editors, photojournalists, their subjects and perhaps
even their viewers still carry an intuitive core belief in the
fundamental veracity of images made with a camera, particularly when
those images are of "real people" and "real events," have the look of
"reality" and are published as "reality." This study further argues
that this core belief in visual truth governs behavior with images and
image making.
This paper presents results of an ethnographic study of the process
through which journalistic photographs are created and published. The
researcher observed daily practice at nine newspapers, interviewing
and
photographing editors and photojournalists at work to find out what
some
members of those groups believe about the production and use of
still
news photographs and how those groups adapt their behavior and
thought
processes as a result of those beliefs. The product of the study is
a
set of clues about photojournalistic practice leading to specific
recommendations for changing the rationale, production and use of still
news photographs. Results can be used to revise photojournalism and
media literacy curricula, and as an impetus for future empirical
testing.
Theoretical Approaches
The underlying theoretical bases for this study were derived from frame
analysis (Goffman, 1974), social construction of reality (Berger and
Luckmann, 1967, and Tuckmann,1978) and visual perception (Gregory,
1970;
Arnheim, 1969 and 1974; Gombrich, 1961; and Gombrich, et al., 1972).
The study explores the idea that although the
constructionist-mediated-subjectivist epistemological frame may be
generally accepted in the theoretical literature of communication and
other social sciences, few editors, photographers, art directors,
educators, subjects or readers/viewers have translated those views into
constructivist practice in the production of news images or in the
use
of news media. The study also will draw from research in visual
perception indicating that even when we know cognitively that something
we see cannot be true, "it is extremely difficult for us to see
correctly" (Gregory, p. 56). One of the researcher's primary goals is
to advance visual theory by integrating and applying these three
theoretical strains to the analysis of current photojournalistic
practice and use. The researcher is convinced this sort of complex
cross-theoretical approach is essential to meaningful research in
visual
communication.
One particular concept explored in the study, objectivity, has been the
subject of an enormous body of literature in media criticism.
Discussions about the media at least until mid-twentieth century
emphasized the need for objective reporting by word journalists, and
textbooks taught ways to achieve the goal of supposedly unbiased
information. During the last 30 years media research has increasingly
supported the idea that objectivity actually is an unobtainable
value, a
myth, a societal ritual, an organizational routine or a fall-back
ideology to protect the hurried journalist in everyday practice
(Goffman, 1974; Tuchman, 1978; Shoemaker and Reese, 1991). Social
scientists and natural scientists alike have come to question everything
from the scientific method to our ways of understanding the world
and
ourselves (Berger and Luckmann, 1967)
However, little attention was given in the early part of this century
to the need for objective visual reporting, perhaps because so much
attention was given to words and because of assumptions that
photographs
were "exactly repeatable pictorial statements" that did not lie
(Ivins).
In spite of the fact that photographs have been overtly manipulated
almost since the invention of photography, little attention was paid
to
overt manipulation by visual journalists--much less to covert
manipulation--until the development of literature in photojournalism
ethics over the last 15 to 20 years. Codes of ethics for
photojournalists now insist that no news photograph should be
staged,
posed, set up or recreated (Reaves, 1993). All of this is carefully
conducted in pursuit of the journalistic ideal of objectivity--which,
by
tradition, we have been led to believe gives a measure of so-called
objective truth.
This study examines issues of photojournalistic objectivity and visual
truth by questioning whether most people, including photojournalists
and
their editors, translate the idea that reality is mediated into
everyday
production and use of news images. The study argues that the
objectivist tradition dies hard, that news practitioners, especially
editors, photojournalists and even photojournalism educators, for the
most part, still function on the deeply imbedded assumption that
there
is a reality "out there" to be objectified, documented,
photographed,
written about, studied, observed, captured, revealed or taken--rather
than created, manipulated, managed, staged, mediated or constructed.
The
core hypothesis of this study is that the fundamental belief in the
veracity of observable phenomena still governs practice and use of
visual news media.
Of course, the researcher had to acknowledge going into the study that
she did not expect to find "objective truth," any more than she
believes
there is an objective truth to be found. Nevertheless, it seemed
evident that studying the process of contemporary photojournalistic
practice from start to finish might help us understand more about how
we
come to view our world, particularly how we come to know our worlds
through newspaper photographs. At the very least, I hoped to determine
what some editors, photojournalists and subjects think they are
doing,
what some viewers think they are seeing, and what this observer
thinks
is going on in current newspaper photojournalism. I began the study
with the confidence that even if my hypothesis--that editors and
photojournalists still base their practice on belief in the fundamental
objectivity of the camera--proved to be false, I still would gain
important information: that, in fact, we are better off in terms of
producing and understanding media information than many of us think we
are. To take this argument one step further: I reasoned that even
if I
found that no one believed photojournalistic images are
credible/objective/truthful, and that everyone believed all news
images
are constructions, I would nevertheless find editors and
photojournalists and even subjects still acting as if the images
were
objectively true (Shoemaker and Reese). In that process they still
decide what the images will be, and research strongly suggests that
what
we see we remember, even if we know what we see is a lie (Graber,
1990).
Research Questions
This study examines parts of the complex process of human interaction
that results in a published newspaper photograph (Newton, 1984).
Concepts involved include a confusing, overlapping array of terms--such
as, journalistic routines of objectivity, the myth of objectivity,
social reality versus objective reality, representation of
subject/object, straight photography versus manipulated images, and
the
nature of visual perception. This study did not seek to produce
quantitative data defining such concepts or testing empirical hypotheses
incorporating those concepts. Rather, the study sought to use a
qualitative approach to explore such concepts and to look for possible
new interpretations or patterns of behavior
by asking several key questions:
yWhat do editors believe they are doing when they assign a photographer
to a story or select a photograph to publish?
yWhat do photojournalists believe they are doing when they "take" or
"make" a photograph?
yWhat do subjects believe they are doing when they are photographed for
a newspaper?
yWhat do viewers believe they are seeing when they glance at a
photograph in a newspaper?
yWhat can a participant observer determine by watching the process
closely and talking with its protagonists?
These questions were not phrased from the arrogant research standpoint
of "What the heck do these people think they are doing?", but rather
from a sincere desire to know what we think we are about in this
important profession of photojournalism.
Method
This study examined these issues through a qualitative fieldwork
project in which photojournalistic images were tracked from inception in
the news room or life occurrences through the photojournalist's and
subject's image-making processes, through the editing and layout
process, through the publishing process. I set out to observe practice
at three newspapers ranging from a small-town daily to a major
metropolitan newspaper. With the support of two university grants, I
observed photojournalism practice at The Albuquerque Journal, The
Albuquerque Tribune, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Los Angeles
Times, The Nashville Tennessean, The San Angelo Standard-Times, The
Seattle Times, The Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald, and The
Washington
Post. Ethnographic methods, including participant observation, note
taking, interviewing, tape recording and still photography were used
to
obtain and record verbal and visual data during image-making events.
I
talked with editors and managing editors, photojournalism educators,
cab
drivers and fellow train riders. I went with photojournalists on
assignments ranging from photographing a $15,000 goat to staking out a
senator's office on Capitol Hill. I flew thousands of miles, shot
dozens of rolls of film with a trusty Nikon F2 Photomic and a 28-mm
lens, filled dozens of note pads, recorded days of tape, and have spent
months thinking about and analyzing the data I gathered.
Results
The most exciting finding was the idea that photojournalists hold the
key to their survival in their ability to translate real-world
experiences into reasonably accurate still photographs for publication.
I did find support for my theory that even though photojournalism
professionals may acknowledge that reality is subjective, they still
practice as if reality can be objectified. Another exciting and
unanticipated finding was the rediscovery of a vital, dedicated,
energetic group of visual journalists committed to presenting the best
truth they can--every day. Another important finding was the
urgency
for an efficient, ethically strict system for archiving digital
images
at newspapers.
Critical to note is the fact that the conclusions I am reporting are
drawn from my own subjective observations and analyses of verbal and
visual information. I have tried to remain as neutral an observer as
possible, but I have to admit to the joy I felt as a participant
observer in the newsroom and during assignments. Also important to
point out is that the study is based on qualitative information; the
conclusions are not statistically generalizable. My observations,
conclusions and recommendations are my best interpretation of what I
saw, heard and felt during a year of critical, deliberate study.
Hypothesis and Research Questions
I will begin my discussion of results by the answering the questions
originally posed. First, my observations suggest strong support for
the
core hypothesis, that the fundamental belief in the veracity of
observable phenomena still governs practice and use of visual newspaper
journalism. The practice of photojournalism continues as if it is
an
objective practice. Most photojournalists and their editors adhere
to
the idea that photographs--even news photographs--may be mediated in
the
sense of lens, angle and distance choice; timing, editing, and
captioning influences, and so forth. However, the discourse of many of
these dedicated professionals expresses a confusion typical of our
post-postmodernist times: they know about contemporary theories of
mediated reality and they talk a good game; but at least some behave as
if there is still an objective reality to be photographed, and
further,
they overtly and covertly manipulate subject matter as routine
practice.
Examples of this conflict in discourse and practice include: "Of
course I don't tell my subjects what to do" (but often they do), "Of
course I don't alter reality" (but often they do--beyond the
unavoidable
altering attributable to individual perception), "Of course I have a
point of view that influences my pictures," (but, "I do not manipulate
my subject matter"), "Of course I select the person, place, moment,
and
that in and of itself can create a view of reality" (but, "look at
how I
captured that moment").
Answering the original research questions will summarize support for
the general hypothesis.
yWhat do editors believe they are doing when they assign a photographer
to a story or select a photograph to publish?
For the most part editors say they want the photographer to get the
best truth in the best picture in the quickest amount of time.
Conflict
still arises, however, over whose truth is the best truth: the
photographer's, the photo editor's, the reporter's, the word editor's,
the page designer's, and so forth. An even greater conflict can
arise
when a photojournalist comes back with an incredible
photograph--that
may not be the best conveyor of the story according to someone else's
truth.
yWhat do photojournalists believe they are doing when they "take" or
"make" a photograph?
For the most part photojournalists seem to believe they are taking
photographs of found truths, but they also acknowledge to a varying
extent the subjective nature of their own techniques and points of
view.
Many draw distinctions among different kinds of assignments. A fire
story, for example, might warrant absolutely no overt manipulation of
subject matter, whereas an environmental portrait might allow
placement
of the subject by a window for better light. Most photojournalists
believe it is their job to make a good picture out of something that
may
not be very visually interesting--even if it means the photographer
has
a heavy hand in creating the subject matter, or at least the
approach to
the subject matter.
yWhat do subjects believe they are doing when they are photographed for
a newspaper?
Subjects, for the most part, seem to be amazingly attuned to the
routines of newspaper photography. By this I mean that they know how to
pose, they know how to behave as if they are not posing, they know
how
to draw the photographer's eye, they know how to get a photographer
out
to shoot, they know how make pictures more visually interesting.
Yet
subjects also appear to be willing participants in the "as if" game:
"Let's all act as if this moment is real, so we can create that fine
moment of reality for publication in the newspaper just the way we
want
it." Subjects are concerned about how they will look, about
controlling
their images (to varying degrees), about the power of the
photographer
to make them look good or bad, and about the anticipation of getting
their pictures in the newspaper (whether as unmanipulated as possible
or
absolutely staged seems not to matter to some).
yWhat do viewers believe they are seeing when they glance at a
photograph in a newspaper?
Viewers still believe their newspapers for the most part--at least they
say they do. They seldom pause long enough to question what they
see in
news photographs, even if they have knowledge of how an image can be
manipulated.
Other Findings
Part of the beauty of the ethnographic method is that hypotheses and
research questions are only guidelines for the study. The appearance
of
unexpected paths can often take the ethnographer to more exciting
destinations than ever anticipated. As noted at the beginning of this
results section, I came to several unanticipated conclusions. The
most
important findings included:
yFar from a dying profession whose decline has been heralded for years
in the face of digital imagery and multi-media technology, newspaper
photojournalism appears to be alive and well in the communities
studied.
yContrary to naysayers about the impact of digital imaging on
photojournalism, it appears that digital imaging's influence is largely
positive. The positive effects include increased speed and
efficiency,
better internal communication and higher standards of ethics.
--Speed and efficiency
While some bemoan the loss of darkroom control, others delight in the
efficiency of shooting color negative film, running it through the
Noritsu and scanning in the selected frame. Editors brag about getting
a digital image on the wire seconds after it was made rather than
having
to rush back through traffic to run film. It's as if the new
technology
has breathed new life into newspaper photojournalism: faster tools
with
which to beat the competition.
--Better internal communication
Most of the photojournalism operations observed had made important moves
in terms of physical proximity to the newsroom. Many were now in a
central part of the newsroom and therefore more accessible to word
reporters and editors and page designers. Teamwork was encouraged,
especially on big stories. In addition, some photographers and photo
editors reported better community among their own staffs. No longer
divided by darkroom revolving doors, staffers working at computer
workstations were freer to talk with each other about stories and
pictures, to compare notes about technique, or to discuss work and life
issues.
--Higher ethical standards
Contrary to frequently expressed fears that digital imaging will lead
to increased manipulation of news photographs, and therefore less
credibility, the fear of what "could happen" seems to be making many
good photojournalists and editors stricter than ever about visual
ethics. Twenty years ago, for example, setting up a photograph not only
was common--it was a technique taught in photojournalism schools.
Now
setups are verboten except under special circumstances "where the
reader
will know" the shot is setup because the setup is so obvious. The
paradox of digital imaging may be that the new technology blatantly
demonstrates overt and covert image manipulation to the point that we
understand on every-deepening levels the need for careful, conscious
interpretation of daily news to readers.
ySome effects of digital imaging are, of course, negative. The biggest
negative effect may be the difficulty archiving digital files--both
in a
physical sense and in an ethical sense. As one photo editor noted,
we
used to be able to count on going back to original negatives and
contact
sheets or slides to compare the differences between prints and
originals, to compare one frame within the context of an entire shoot,
to pull up the shot deemed unimportant at the time of the edit. As
we
move increasingly toward digitized images, the tendency is toward
archiving "THE" shot and dumping the rest. We may no longer have the
technology, management systems or the space to preserve a whole
shoot.
yPhotographers are more likely to be considered visual reporters, whose
points of view, story ideas and contributions to overall coverage
and
ultimate editing/production of a story with visuals is considered
invaluable.
yPhotojournalists' attempts to replace "refrigerator pictures"--the
grip and grins, check signings, ribbon cuttings, fish recordings--with
"real photojournalism" may be one factor contributing to readership
decline. One answer to the problem may be to reserve special sections
for such pictures, rather than to eliminate them.
Many other patterns are emerging from my analysis of this rich body of
material. They include:
ythe tendency of many newspapers to have "star" photojournalists
ythe photojournalists' continued commitment to make images that make a
difference in people's lives
ythe increasingly strong role of photo editors in the management of the
newspaper
ythe pervasiveness of digital imaging over wet labs
yincreased diversity among shooters and editors--though still far from
representative percentages in terms of race or gender
Discussion
This study addresses one of the most critical concerns facing news
media as they enter the twenty-first century: we can no longer believe
our eyes. Technology has made possible the physical alteration and
creation of any photographically real image we can envision. The line
between fact and fiction, science and art, news and entertainment,
information and advertising has become increasingly blurred. Yet
somehow we must continue to disseminate the visual and verbal
information necessary to inform the masses about matters beyond their
local universes. This study was based on an assumption that
successful
and reasonably truthful communication of news through visual images
is
not only highly desirable but also possible--but we must frame the
production and use of those images as mediated communication, rather
than as the capturing and publication of objective reality.
Print journalism and, to some extent, all news media are suffering a
decline in public trust (Kelly and Nace). As the media move toward
even
more varied and easily manipulated forms of representation and
creation,
the issue of truth and how we come to know anything about our world
becomes increasingly critical. If the media are to continue the
time-honored and necessary tradition of informing the public, media
professionals and users must understand more about the process of
communicating the most powerful of all information--visual information
(Ivins). This study sought to take a hard look at how news images
are
being made and used during this volatile period of merging
technologies
and ideologies.
What I observed was a committed core of photojournalists and editors
dedicated to producing the best images possible--and that usually
meant
the least manipulated, most accurate images they could make--with
awareness of the potential to mislead and misinform viewers through the
manipulation of those images and therefore the construction of the
news.
Photojournalism practice does seem to be proceeding through the
postmodern skepticism of objective reality as if we still can know, or
objectify some things. The glory lies in the notion that maybe we
can
know some things: we know Nelson Rockefeller shot the finger in
public,
we know Robert Kennedy lay dying, we know bodies were stockpiled in
Rwanda. At stake is the soul of photojournalism--the survival of a
form
of reality production--at once mediated and true. The paradox is
that
in this unreal, constructed, perceived world of ours, we sometimes
see
sparks of something we can call reasonably true because of the skill
and
integrity of those who created the sparks. Far from being the
demise of
photojournalism, new technologies are clarifying our standards and
ethical codes. As we proceed on the cusp of the Virtual Age, we may
also be living in the Age of the Photojournalist, an era when one of
the
few things we can trust as reasonably true may be good
photojournalism.
Through careful study and analysis we can make informed, critical
decisions about how to move forward wisely with credible visual imagery
in local and global news communication. My primary recommendations
based on my observations are that we recognize the critical nature of
this time in the history of photojournalism; that we set and maintain
increasingly higher standards for the practice of photojournalism;
that
we educate ourselves, our editors and word reporters, our designers,
our
marketers, and certainly, our viewers/readers about various forms
and
degrees of image manipulation; and that we never give up trying to
understand, record, interpret and discuss in various ways our various
worlds simply because we now understand there is no such thing as
objective TRUTH. I recommend that we work diligently to redesign
photojournalism routines so that they openly acknowledge the subjective
nature of visual knowledge while striving to produce reasonably
accurate
visual images. New routines might include structuring caption
information to cite the subjective role of photojournalism in reporting
news; often using more than one exciting image to communicate a
story;
noting when a particularly complelling image is not necessarily
representative of a story, person, place or event; and regularly
including visual literacy lessons through examples published in the
newspaper. We must continue to tighten photojournalism codes of ethics
to prohibit overt manipulation of news photos and to encourage
photojournalists to become conscious of and note even such relatively
minor manipulations as moving a soft-drink can or asking someone to
pose
by a window. We also must rethink the nature of photographs that
win
top awards in terms of the "kinds of realities" they encourage
photojournalists to seek.
I hope this study will contribute to a body of theory and future
research on visual journalism, to the professional practice of working
photojournalists, to media literacy training for viewers/readers and
potential subjects of photojournalism, and to visual journalism
education. If photojournalism--and indeed, journalism--is to survive,
we must do what we say we do--and be sure we can do what say we can
do.
That will probably mean letting go of the myth of photojournalistic
objectivity, inviting our subjectivity where appropriate, and
acknowledging the limitations of our ways of knowing about the
world--even as we strive to produce reasonably accurate accounts of what
is happening in our worlds. Perhaps studies such as this one can
help
us understand how photojournalists can make their images
increasingly
worthy of public trust, rather than increasingly unbelievable. And
perhaps we can begin the twenty-first century knowing we can believe
what we see in good images of photojournalism.
Truth . . . is something we make in the encounter with the world
that is making us (McLuhan and Powers, 1989, p. xi).
Selected Bibliography
Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and Visual Perception, A Psychology of the Creative
Eye,
rev. ed. Berkeley: University of California Press, Ltd.
Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual Thinking. Berkeley: University of California
Press,
Ltd.
Banks, A. (1994). "Images trapped in two discourses: photojournalism codes and
the
international news flow," Journal of Communication Inquiry 18:1
(Winter): 118-134.
Berger, P.O., and Luckmann, T. The social construction of reality, a treatise
in
the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books ed. New York:
Doubleday, 1967.
Blumer. H. Symbolic interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,
Inc.,
1969.
Boorstin, D.J. (1961). The image: a guide to pseudo-events in America. New
York:
Harper and Row.
Brink, B. "Question of ethics: where does honesty in photojournalism begin?
'The
foundation is basic, simple honesty,' an editor says," News
Photographer, June 1988,
pp. 21-33.
"Deceit is a mark of civilization," Utne reader, No. 54 (November/December
1992),
pp. 64-65.
Goffman, E. Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.
Goffman, E. Gender advertisements. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
Goffman, E. The presentation of self in everyday life. Woodstock, N.Y.: The
Overlook Press, 1973.
Goldberg, V. "The Politics of Photography," brochure opening exhibition
Photojournalism Since Vietnam, October-November 1992, Center for Research in
Contemporary Art (CRCA), University of Texas at Arlington.
Gombrich, E.H. (1961). Art and illusion, a study in the psychology of pictorial
representation. rev. ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gombrich, E.H.; Hochberg, J., and Black, M. (1972). Art, Perception, and
Reality.
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Graber, D. (1990). "Seeing is remembering: how visuals contribute to learning
from
television news," Journal of Communication 40(3), Summer, pp.
134-155.
Gregory, R.L. (1990). Eye and brain, the psychology of seeing. 4th ed., with
new
intro. R.L. Gregory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gregory, R.L. (1970). The intelligent eye. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Ivins, W. M., Jr. Prints and visual communication. Cambridge: The M.I.T.
Press,
third printing, 1978, originally published in 1953.
Kelly, J.D. and Nace, D. (1993). "The effects of specific knowledge of digital
image manipulation capabilities and newspaper context on the
believability of news
photographs. Paper presented to the Visual Communication
Division, Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Kansas City, Mo.,
August 1993.
McLuhan, M., and Powers, B. (1989). The global village, transformations in
world
life and media in the 21st century. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Newton, J.H. (1994). "Emotion, Personality and Control as Indicators of Subject
Response in Photography," paper presented to Visual Communication
Division,
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Atlanta,
Ga., 1994.
Reaves, S. (1993). "Re-examining the ethics of photographic posing: insights
from
the rank-and-file members of ASMP," paper presented to Visual
Communication
Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, Kansas
City, Mo., August 1993.
Shoemaker, P.J., and Reese, S.D. (1991). Mediating the message, theories of
influences on mass media content. New York: Longman.
Tagg, J. (1988). The burden of representation, essays on photographies and
histories. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news, a study in the construction of reality. New
York: The Free Press.
|
