Early on, photography’s ability to record detail unlike any other visual medium led people to believe photographs at face value. Yet photographers, for reasons of technical limitations or artistic expression, took advantage of the medium’s creative capacities in efforts of representing truthfulness instead of truth. Over time, the idea of manipulating photographs, particularly in the ‘age of Photoshop’ (1990s), was considered immoral. In an era of growing support for collaborative global humanitarian healthcare aid and an era of AI, the question of ‘what is photo manipulation?’ has resurfaced and broadened.
In looking at these images, ask yourself:
- Which images are fake?
- What makes an authentic image?
- What impact does manipulation have on the image's message?
Children are considered apolitical, innocent and dependent. No matter the political situation their suffering is associated with, a wide range of donors will support care for children. This may be beneficial in the short-term—aid will come—but in the long-term it has had led certain groups of people or entire continents (e.g., Africa) to be stereotyped as infantile and dependent.
Compare the photographs:
With the introduction of digital photography editing tools the terms ‘photoshopping’ or ‘photoshopped’ entered our lexicon and increased skepticism of images. News agencies (e.g., Associated Press, Reuters) quickly created tight restrictions on the use of any post-production image manipulation. Yet examples still emerge from time-to-time of photographers being “caught” altering images.
Global humanitarian humanitarian healthcare organizations also have codes of conduct related to images. There are times these organizations have not lived up to their own standards.
Follow the QR code links to see examples:







