![Sample our Arts journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110799/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Arts.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper argues that the rise of new digital technologies and new amateur/citizen practices of photographic production have constituted a “short-circuit” that has critically destabilized but also productively challenged professional photojournalism. In this context, the paper focuses on the practice of digital post-production (i.e. digitally “retouching” and “enhancing” photographs), as an empirical prism through which to theoretically discuss wider technological, professional, and cultural shifts that have been affecting news photography over the last decade. In particular, drawing on in-depth interviews with international photojournalists, jury members of press photo contests, and directors of digital post-production labs, the paper analyzes a few paradigmatic case studies of post-produced news photographs that have recently won prestigious professional awards, yet have generated considerable controversies. Through the analysis of the case studies, the paper aims to shed light on the contested construction of aesthetic conventions and professional-ethical standards within digital photojournalism, in relation to (1) the shifting professional ideal of visual news “objectivity,” and (2) the shifting symbolic boundaries between professional and non-professional news photo producers. Finally, introducing the notion of “digital cultural capital,” the paper suggests the theoretical relevance of a (post-)Bourdieusian approach to photojournalism, which frames the conflictual implementation of new digital technologies and the diffusion of new social and material practices as a symbolic struggle for professional distinction within the wider visual culture.
Acknowledgements
I greatly thank Karin Becker and Gillian Rose for the insightful comments they offered on a previous version of this paper at the conference “Beyond the Frame: The Future of the Visual in an Age of Digital Diversity,” organized by the Nordic Network for Digital Visuality (Stockholm, April 2014). I also thank two anonymous journal reviewers for their constructive suggestions.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Stephen Mayes, interview, New York, January 2014.
2. Francesco Zizola, interview, Rome, January 2010. (translation from Italian by the author)
3. Claudio Palmisano, interview, Rome, June 2013. (translation from Italian by the author)
4. “Danish Photoshop Debate Leads to Disqualification” (https://www.nppa.org/news/811).
5. “Digital Photography Experts Confirm the Integrity of Paul Hansen’s Image Files” (http://www.worldpressphoto.org/news/digital-photography-experts-confirm-integrity-paul-hansen-image-files).
6. “Photographer Says His 2013 World Press Photo of the Year is Not a Fake, Judges Agree” (http://www.news.com.au/technology/photographer-says-his-2013-world-press-photo-of-the-year-is-not-a-fake/story-e6frfro0-1226642304141).
7. “HDR Photography, Evolution, and Ethics. Is it Journalism or is it Art?” (https://nppa.org/page/9341).
8. “‘Fake’ World Press Photo Isn’t Fake, is Lesson in Need for Forensic Restraint” (http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-05/16/photo-faking-controversy).