Media Ethics Discussion 
Harris maintains that “it should be acknowledged that to colour correct the skies in Orange County Register photos to a specific blue is wrong". Why? What’s the big deal about changing the colour of the sky, according to Harris? Do you think that there are ever instances where digital manipulation is acceptable or should be encouraged? Support your answer with photographic evidence if possiblenet
This very ambiguity between what is stated and what is actually done is part of the digital manipulation problem. It gives rise to "slippery slope" ethical decision making. Maybe an adjustment will be made concerning the Orangc County sky today, and tomorrow the decision will be about whether or not to correct a volcanic sky elsewhere.
"tinkering" threatens tc compromise the whole enterprise of picture taking (p. 66). Ironically his prophecy occurred only three pages before one of the computer manipulated images of Mary Decker. The second manipulated picturt~ is on the cover of that issue.
1 think we went too tar in that case. The guy was bald, but he haci .i beard. The guy wasn't a real ringer for Gorbachev. It was sort of an easy thing, where someone said, "gosh, this is a little distracting, can we fix it?" This may be another classic example ot the "law oi the tool. Time had the equipment on hand and automatically used it. The an. nounced concern was that the photo was a "little distracting."
this slippery slope type of decision elsewhere and its inherent flaws quickly surface. Would we want to have eliminated the distractions ap pearing in the pictures of the Reagan assassination attempt or the Ruth Snyder electrocution? Such fixing creates falsehoods.
Credibility is not maintained when one aspect of journalism is considered fair game for manipulation.
y instituting a clear set ot protocols for discussing ethical decisions relating to the use and manipulation of photograph
Accurate representation, through photographic coverage, is the stated goal of this
This very ambiguity between what is stated and what is actually done is part of the digital manipulation problem. It gives rise to "slippery slope" ethical decision making. Maybe an adjustment will be made concerning the Orangc County sky today, and tomorrow the decision will be about whether or not to correct a volcanic sky elsewhere.
"tinkering" threatens tc compromise the whole enterprise of picture taking (p. 66). Ironically his prophecy occurred only three pages before one of the computer manipulated images of Mary Decker. The second manipulated picturt~ is on the cover of that issue.
1 think we went too tar in that case. The guy was bald, but he haci .i beard. The guy wasn't a real ringer for Gorbachev. It was sort of an easy thing, where someone said, "gosh, this is a little distracting, can we fix it?" This may be another classic example ot the "law oi the tool. Time had the equipment on hand and automatically used it. The an. nounced concern was that the photo was a "little distracting."
this slippery slope type of decision elsewhere and its inherent flaws quickly surface. Would we want to have eliminated the distractions ap pearing in the pictures of the Reagan assassination attempt or the Ruth Snyder electrocution? Such fixing creates falsehoods.
Credibility is not maintained when one aspect of journalism is considered fair game for manipulation.
y instituting a clear set ot protocols for discussing ethical decisions relating to the use and manipulation of photograph
Accurate representation, through photographic coverage, is the stated goal of this