The conflicting functions of image editing guidelines in journalism
Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Many major media organizations have published image editing guidelines in recent decades. With a qualitative content analysis of the guidelines of ANP, AP, Reuters, NPPA and WPP and interviews with image editors of ANP, WPP, De Volkskrant, NOS and De Correspondent, two questions are answered: 1. What are the functions of image editing guidelines in journalistic organizations, based on the guidelines themselves and the explanations given by the authors? 2. What are the possible consequences for photojournalists and the public if these functions conflict? The analysis shows that the boundary work function strongly conflicts with the governance function and accountability function. Guidelines for image editing in photojournalism reinforce the myth that ‘news photos are objective’ for the purpose of defining the field of photojournalism (boundary work). As a result, guidelines do not function as well as a quality assurance tool and as a media accountability system, with adverse consequences for photojournalists and the public.
