{"id":3595,"date":"2017-07-27T13:30:48","date_gmt":"2017-07-27T12:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/amdf-centre.org\/?p=3595"},"modified":"2026-07-05T20:11:46","modified_gmt":"2026-07-05T19:11:46","slug":"debunking-fake-photos-how-journalists-and-readers-can-ensure-authenticity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amdf-centre.org\/2017\/07\/27\/debunking-fake-photos-how-journalists-and-readers-can-ensure-authenticity\/","title":{"rendered":"Debunking fake photos: How journalists and readers can ensure authenticity"},"content":{"rendered":"
Nicole Smith Dahmen<\/a> | July 26, 2017<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n

Photographs are more than just an aesthetic element. They help us tell better stories.<\/p>\n

Photos can provide information, such as documentation of newsworthy events<\/a> to proof of scientific discoveries<\/a> to evidence of the horrific effects of war, natural disaster and the like.<\/p>\n

Stories with photos more quickly catch audiences\u2019 attention<\/a>. Photos are processed quickly<\/a>, and they can increase social media engagement<\/a>. And because photographs are a visual information source, audiences do not face a language barrier with international news imagery, as is the case with written or spoken news.<\/p>\n

Perhaps most important, photographs can generate strong emotional reactions in audiences<\/a>, and photographs can be remembered and recognized in such a way as to serve as collective iconic markers of historically significant events<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But photographs can also mislead<\/a>, misrepresent<\/a>\u00a0and lie<\/a>. While some such images have been digitally-altered, we are also seeing examples in which non-manipulated photos are given a politicized narrative to support a particular point of view<\/a>.<\/p>\n

A proliferation of digitally manipulated photographs coupled with political propaganda<\/a> has helped to usher in the post-truth age. And regarding fabricated \u201cnews,\u201d evidence shows<\/a> that photographs themselves help to fuel the virality of false narratives.
\nIn the above image, the man’s face has been flipped, disrupting the shadows’ natural directon. Could you tell the difference? [Via\u00a0Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications]<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Yes, photojournalistic images \u2014 like all news reporting \u2014 are a construction of reality. But mainstream visual journalists work diligently to ensure that their photos are accurate representations. While there have been some grievous ethical lapses by the news media in regard to image manipulation, these are few and far between. In addition, journalism codes of ethics are clear that photographs should not \u201cdistort facts<\/a>\u201d or be edited in such a way as to \u201cmislead viewers or misrepresent subjects<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

With photographs, as with all information, audiences should be skeptical and critically evaluate the credibility of content. However, public questioning is \u201coften absent, or underdeveloped<\/a>.\u201d In addition, recent research<\/a> suggests that audiences generally can\u2019t identify manipulated photos. This is especially concerning as computer algorithms are taking on the task of digital alteration, while photo editing software is simultaneously becoming more sophisticated<\/a>.<\/p>\n

So, yes, it is becoming more challenging to detect digital manipulation. But there are steps that both journalists and audiences can \u2014 and should \u2014 take.<\/p>\n

First, visual journalists and news outlets must be vigilant in ensuring photo authenticity<\/strong>, while being more transparent about the capture and treatment of an image. As an example, digital news allows for the space to publish both the final and \u201craw\u201d file of an image \u2014 raw files would allow audiences to see exactly what content had been altered, as well as the image capture information provided with a raw file (such as shutter speed and aperture.)\u00a0Such transparency could help to restore public trust in the news media.<\/p>\n

Second, audiences must learn to critically evaluate content \u2014 especially photographs<\/a><\/strong>. While there are many aspects to consider, these basics can help audiences determine both digital manipulation and non-digital misrepresentation.<\/p>\n

Study photo aesthetics<\/strong>, looking at such details as lighting, angle and crop. Consider the accompanying photo narrative<\/strong> \u2014 the social media post, the caption or the article \u2014 comparing the written word with the photographic documentation. Reflect on the source<\/strong>, learning to separate mainstream news from partisan sources, as well as advertising, public relations, parody and propaganda. Review how other news outlets are reporting<\/strong> the same story, while also visiting nonpartisan fact-checking sites. Finally, acknowledge personal biases<\/strong> about a topic and news outlet.<\/p>\n

Continued journalistic integrity and transparent reporting coupled with informed news consumers can ensure that photographs function as truthful storytellers.<\/p>\n

Nicole Smith Dahmen<\/em><\/a> is an assistant professor of visual communication at the University of Oregon.<\/em><\/p>\n

Main image CC-licensed by Flickr via\u00a0Brian Gratwicke<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n