Lesson 9: Visual Ethics

Betty K. Spiers

bettyks@vt.edu

August 11, 2015

1. As an Instructional Technology Resource Teacher in my county, I conduct workshops over the summer for county faculty members. These trainings focus on a variety of topics such as how to use various software programs, available hardware, and online programs that the county has subscriptions to. During the workshops, following the how-to use instruction and ways to integrate into the classroom, teachers are given time to create resources to use for the following school year. This is the time that I am often faced with ethical issues. Teachers frequently want to use resources that are already made as a framework for creating another activity. One such example is teachers wanting to create online quizzes and tests by copying a teacher purchased resource book that contains already written passages and questions. Often these created quizzes and tests will be shared and used by other teachers in their school or even across the county.

When I am faced with this situation, I will follow several different options to clarify what is ethical. One option is I will refer to the permissions that are listed in the resource book. Also I can ask the school’s librarian for information concerning rights. The librarians in our county are required to assist teachers on knowing what can be used lawfully and what cannot be used. Another option is to look online for a resource much like the “Can I Use that Picture” infographic or the “Know Your Copy Rights” brochure to direct teachers in the correct ethical way. In this particular situation, I always tell the teachers that they should not reproduce the entire book to create different online quizzes or tests. If this was done and then shared with all teachers in the county, it would damage the possible market value of the resource book.

2.

According to Danielle Nicole Devoss and Julie Platt on the Image Manipulation

in a Digital-Visual World webpage, this is a visual of Julia Roberts that was published on the

cover of Redbook magazine. The responsible party for this image is Hearst Publications, the

publishers of Redbook magazine. The purpose of this visual was to attract consumers to purchase

the magazine in local grocery stores, drug stores, and magazine stands. This particular image was

altered in several ways. The publishers of Redbook decided not to do a photo shoot with Julia

Roberts. They did not want to spend the money on securing the actress, makeup, hair, wardrobe,

and touchups. Instead, they took the headshot from one image and the body shot from another

image. Through the use of photo editing software such as PhotoShop, both of the images were

combined together to create the image that was used on the cover of the magazine.

In this particular image, Julia Roberts is presented in an attractive image that

includes beautiful hair, makeup and a stunning red sequined dress. As the cover hit the stands, it

was detected that something was not correct with the photograph. Buyers recognized the head

and the body did not fit together. After this was questioned, the publishers revealed what actually

took place.

How could this impact the magazine? The manipulation displayed by the publishers

falsified what buyers turn to as they read articles they feel are true. Below the picture of Julia

Roberts, you will find the heading “The Real Julia”. This particular phrase is ironic in the sense

that the altered image is not the real Julia Roberts. Implementing acts should as this, could

potentially harm their reputation and future magazine sales even though many realize that this is

frequently done.

Even though magazines such as Redbook do not have the strict ethical guidelines that

news editors and photojournalist have when it comes to manipulating images, there are still

ethics that can be considered by others. Readers become vulnerable to the images that are being

published. At times, woman can obtain a negative self image from looking at these polished

images that make the subjects appear to be perfect in every way. The effects can be a low self

esteem to potential eating disorders as readers attempt to obtain the perfect body image.

Another consideration to think about is with the actress Julia Roberts. How does she

feel following the manipulation of her image? What are her ethical values and how does this hurt

her image following an image being published that was not real. I am assuming that she must

have given them permission but it definitely could become an ethical issue on her part as well.

I will honestly admit that when I look at images on magazines, I initially do not think

about the manipulation that goes into the final product. We often hear people as we look at

images say, I wish I could look half that good or I wish I had a body or hair like that person.

Typically we do not consider that the person in the photograph does not look that way either. I

understand the need to market the product, but I think I would prefer a more realistic image than

one that is so altered that you are not sure what parts are real or not real.

Resources

Image Manipulation and Ethics in a Digital-Visual World. (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2015.

According to Danielle Nicole Devoss and Julie Platt on the Image Manipulation in a

Digital-Visual World webpage, the shark attacking a man visual is an internet hoax that made its

way through emails during the 1990s. The responsible party for creating the image is unknown.

The purpose of this visual was to draw attention to an image that would make people want to

share among family, friends, and internet connections. The visual went out as an email message

and was described as being a nomination for National Geographic’s photo of the year.

According to Stentor Danielson and David Braun with National Geographic News, the

visual consisted of two images that had been manipulated to create the final image. The shark

image was taken by Charles Maxwell in South Africa and the helicopter image was taken by

Lance Cheung. The two original images were joined together to create the hoax image.

As this image was created and shared, it was done in a nonthreatening way. The original

creator probably had no harmful intentions when this was generated and passed on through

emails around the world. They probably just wanted to see how far it would go and how much

publicity it would receive. As this image was circulated, it did spark issues with National

Geographic and the photographer of the shark. National Geographic added to their website a

statement disclaiming the authenticity of the image. Charles Maxwell, the photographer of the

shark, also had concerns. He stated that even though it was done as a joke, it was wrong to take

images from the internet and use them without permission.

The photo sparked a discussion of how the creator did not have rights or permission to

use the photographs to create the manipulated image. Legal and ethical standards were infringed

on as the manipulated image surfaced on the internet. Using property that belongs to others

without permission is an inappropriate use of moral standards. Copy right, fair use, creative

commons and public domain guidelines need to be abided by correctly within our society. These

standards need to be taught and modeled for our younger generation so they will understand

what is legal and ethical when it comes to using something that belongs to someone else.

As I consider my values and ideas of using images from the internet, I am careful to use

and teach to others the correct way to utilize images that do not belong to you. Using websites

that contain the guidelines of copyright, fair use, creative commons and public domain is a

resource that I follow, model, and share with others. I understand the disheartening feelings of

creating something and then it be manipulated by someone else. In addition, it can also damage

the creditability of the original creator.

Resources

Image Manipulation and Ethics in a Digital-Visual World. (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2015.

Shark "Photo of the Year" Is E-Mail Hoax. (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2015.