part of my daily routine includes checking the headlines on the NPPA's website.  usually, the stories contain information on clip winners, photographers of the year, upcoming seminars and workshops, and occasionally [sadly] a scandal or news about journalists covering/captured in Iraq.

last week, i wrote about one such scandal, about the big photojournalism no-no: editing news photographs. 

this morning's headline brought my heart to an all-time low, regarding this profession i regard in the highest:

Toledo Blade Discovers Dozens Of Doctored Detrich Photos

seriously, folks.  we, as photojournalists and members of the National Press Photographers Association, sign and agree to a Digital Manipulation Code of Ethics.  this means that we stand by the standards of telling the truth, no matter what.  the integrity of news reporting depends on this code, and when one of our peers breaks it, it affects all of us. 

here's excerpts from the Toledo Blade's article by the Vice President / Executive Editor, Ron Royhab:

A basic rule: Newspaper photos must tell the truth

[...]
We conducted an internal investigation and found that since January dozens of digitally altered photographs of his were published either in the newspaper or on our Web site.

Readers have asked us why this was such a big deal. What's wrong with changing the content of a photograph that is published in a newspaper?

The answer is simple: It is dishonest.

Journalism, whether by using words or pictures, must be an accurate representation of the truth.

[...]
An intensive investigation of Mr. Detrich's work, conducted by Nate Parsons, The Blade's director of photography, found that since January of this year, Mr. Detrich submitted 947 photographs for publication, of which 79 had been digitally altered.

Twenty-seven of the altered photographs were published both in the newspaper and on toledoblade.com, and an additional 31 were published only on toledoblade.com. Another 21 altered photographs submitted by Mr. Detrich were not published.

[...]
Honesty is the fundamental value in journalism.

When a Blade reporter or photographer covers a news event, the newspaper and its readers expect an accurate record of the event.

Reporters and editors are not allowed to change quotes or alter events to make them more dramatic. Photographers and photo editors cannot digitally alter the content in the frame of a photograph to make the image more powerful or artistic.

[...]
This newspaper has a terrific staff of professional journalists. They work hard to bring you the truth in stories and photographs of what is happening in our community, every day of the year. It is especially dismaying to have something like this happen that may cast doubt on our work.

It's impossible to make sense of why this happened, and we are embarrassed by it. But it is important that we are up front and honest with our readers.

[...]
In this respect, we let our readers down, and we apologize for that and pledge to you that we will do better.

Mr. Royhab, thank you for explaining to your readers (and the general public hearing about this through electronic media) the importance of integrity in our work as photographers, as journalists.   We know truth in reporting is [an unfortunate] constant uphill battle, and hope that this incident will help us focus our efforts and raise the standards by which we work.

****
to my neighbors, friends, colleagues and passer-bys:

this discovery will change our profession.  whether photo editors now require absolutely NO editing whatsoever (ie: images in RAW format or just straight from the camera) or a new influx of FILM ONLY requirements against the current trends for digital transmission, we shall see.  

the coming months will most likely bring changes and crack-downs in newsrooms. 
at a time when newspapers are slashing staff positions, the outlook could be bleak.
but, hopefully, the overall effect of this situation will be all for the better.

as a [semi] professional [working my way] in the field, stories like this scare the crap out of me. 

seemingly innocent mistakes can cost you your entire career as a photojournalist in the digital age.  a little snip here, a little clone there, and you've got yourself a picture-perfect . . . picture.  but is it reality?  is it news? 

the reality of digital editing is a constant discussion [and often a heated debate] - now that we rely on digital images instead of tangible film, when does editing step beyond fixing the image to be visible and accurate (ie: adjusting levels, a little dodging and burning for correct exposure) and cross the line into false reporting (cloning out people, backgrounds, words, taking anything out or putting anything in that wasn't there originally)?

we've heard stories of 'doctored' images of war from AP photographers, but the most recent victim of public ridicule for changing a news story photo comes from the Toledo Blade in Ohio.  below is a set of images of four different cover page photos, from four different photographers at the same event. 

i first learned about this from the news section on the NPPA's website.  if you have a minute to read the article, the entire story is detailed with corresponding links to corrections issued by the Blade and to Allan Detrich's blog.

the moral of the story?

no matter how much you want to, or think maybe this one time i won't get caught, or think you won't make the same transmission mistake he did . . .  do not edit news story photos.

ever.

What's your dream career? 
Submitted by Something.

basic answer: a photojournalist

lofty answer: a photographer for the NFL, Associated Press, New York Times, Washington Post or other major market newspaper / wire service

realistic answer: a staff photographer for a local (probably weekly, but would prefer daily) newspaper

since college, i've had the notion that my dream life would have me working for a daily newspaper, either staff or freelance, and teaching a photography class or two at a college or university.  unfortunately, teaching in a college or university requires a master's degree, which i can't afford.  (not yet, anyway.  i'd love to get it someday.)  and there's about |__| (this) many staff openings, and |________________________| (this) many photographers looking for these openings . . .  so it's hard to stay hopeful that i'll be able to realize my dream.

but, i keep hoping and trying to acheive even just my realistic answer.  i've got my stuff out to the Fairfax County Times for a posting i found on the NPPA board, and although i haven't heard anything yet, i'm still hopeful.  the info went through on friday morning, and i'll be following up later in the week to make sure everything was received.  (the listing was put up on tuesday . . .  i'm hoping waiting till friday to send my stuff wasn't too long - it had to be perfect!)

keep the fingers crossed that someone gives me the chance to follow my dreams!