In this episode I am joined once again by Photographer and Educator Jill P Mott. We discuss Photo Ethics today and how it effects people and what we are content consumers need to do on our part.
You can see Jill’s work @http://www.jillpmottphotography.com/
And her Instagram https://instagram.com/jillpmottphotography/
Also be sure and check out the Podcast Facebook Group
Images from this episode can be found at the Podcast Website along with the show notes.
Transcription by www.temi.com, there may be grammatical errors.
You can check out Rachel Magario’s work on her Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/rachelmagario/
Liam 00:00:00 You’re listening to the Liam photography podcast. I’m your host Liam Douglas and this is episode 37 so in this week’s episode I wanted to do something a little bit different with all the craziness that goes on today, especially on social media and the Internet in general. I wanted to talk about photo ethics and I’m going to be joined for today’s episode by Jill Mott and we are going to get started right now.
Liam 00:00:47 you’re listening to the Liam Photography podcast. I’m your host Liam Douglas and this is episode 37 I want to take a moment and thank all of my listeners for subscribing, rating and reviewing an iTunes and anywhere else you might be listening to the show, which also includes radio.com as of the last couple of months, we want to thank the firstname.lastname@example.org again for adding this show to their library. So for this week’s episode I wanted to cover a topic that’s kind of a hot topic these days and simply put, we’re going to want to talk about photo ethics. Now, I’m sure many of my listeners have seen photographs that have been posted on Facebook or Twitter or Instagram or other social media platforms. They ended up going viral and then it comes out that the photograph is a total fake, that somebody doctored the photo in one form or another and then posted it because they had some sort of agenda or they were trying to get it to go viral and make themselves famous. So I’m going to be joined now by Jill and Jill. How are you doing?
Jill 00:01:52 Hi, great to be back with you on your podcast.
Liam 00:01:57 Yeah, it’s awesome to have you back this week. And I, and I love the topic that we’re going to be talking about in today’s episode photo ethics. And as I was saying in the Intro, uh, you know, most of my listeners I’m sure have seen photos on the Internet, social media, whatever the case may be, that they personally got all worked up about the image ended up going viral and then it comes out later that the image was completely manipulated or fabricated, that it wasn’t a true representation of what was going on. Or maybe the photograph itself hadn’t been doctored, but the captions included with it were extremely misleading.
Jill 00:02:36 Yes, there’s a lot of different ways that we can be fooled by photos, captains, stories, headline, manipulate in deep freight, erasing information. And there’s a lot that needs to be with that these days and really understand what is going on in it and how truthful it is.
Liam 00:03:00 Yeah, exactly. And I did have some questions I worked up for this episode that I sent you ahead of time. Um, so let’s go ahead and jump in on the first one. And that was given that most news outlets had been caught either manipulating photos or video to put a slant on the story. Why do you think they continue to do this? And I mean, this isn’t something new. This has been going on. Like we were talking about before I brought you on the air and we were, uh, this has been going on since Stalin was in charge of the Soviet Union and he would have somebody in his inner circle killed and then have them airbrushed out of all their photographs.
Jill 00:03:37 Yes, that’s true. And there’s also another thing this one many of your listeners might know from just before World War Two, 1942 with news that Mussolini, uh, and his, his alteration to the photo was him on a horse showing a very powerful position. And he had the course handler taken out and that was really to show his power. So this has been going on for a long, long time.
Liam 00:04:10 Yeah. And that’s the thing, it’s funny is most people think that photo manipulation is a, is a, a more modern era type thing. With the advent of of programs like Photoshop and it’s like no, people have been airbrushed out of photos for over a hundred years as definitely not new
Jill 00:04:26 here. Cropped out all kinds of techniques, not necessarily high quality either. And that is one of the things that we should be listening at with and there more contemporary modifications are bad for or job. So that sort of stuff, you know that datos eye line, those kinds of things really needed to be looked at to to figure out what’s going on in the photo and where it might be false.
Liam 00:04:59 Yeah, exactly. I mean because you know, anytime one of these, these type of manipulated or doctored photos turns up on the Internet and creates a viral response and then you get somebody who’s an actual expert at analyzing photography or photographs and they can spot that. It’s a fake almost immediately either because the lighting’s wrong, the shadows are wrong or something else is wrong in the image that they can pick up easily. So [inaudible] and there are people out there that are incredibly talented, not necessarily for the better with Photoshop. I mean, I’ve seen some really convincing looking fakes. So there are people out there that have some crazy skills with Photoshop. But the big thing that Jill and I don’t want this to be a political episode, that’s not our, that’s not what we’re trying to do here. We’re trying to make the listeners aware of the kind of things that are happening that you might not be aware of, especially in the advent of the Internet and social media today. Um, and as it ties into the media in general, um, so we don’t want this to become a political episode. That’s not the idea. We want to raise awareness about doing your research. You know, if you see something online that doesn’t seem right, maybe instead of just jumping on the bandwagon and flaming people over something, maybe do a little research and find out if the photograph is real or if it’s a fake. Because a lot of times the images that cause the biggest uproar on the Internet are completely fake.
Jill 00:06:30 And that goes back to your first question is why people continue to do this. And the reason is because they’re getting the reaction. They are stirring conversation. They are getting people up in arms, they are motivating people. What are you believe in climate change or not? For example, today we had a lot of protests all over the world. There’s probably some things that we can do in terms of in the environment to improve, but a lot of what is being put out there is for the sole purpose of stirring up people and getting them riled up. And sadly it has gotten to the point where people can no longer really recognize their own bias. And I think this is true for actually some journalists, many, many journalists. They are having a hard time being on bias, putting their own beliefs to the side and really looking at both sides of the coin. And, and it is doing what it’s intended to do. It’s getting people talking about it more so you know, in favor of whatever the um, the it is, or the story is, if you’re having a really strong reaction to something that’s the best time to check yourself. Am I having this reaction because it’s totally off the wall. I would never believe it. It can’t possibly be true the problem we can with your app kind of heart, our emotional reaction. That’s when the first I really step back and say, wait, wait, wait. Is this true?
Liam 00:08:19 Yeah, exactly. Um, and, and one of the most famous recent photographs that that caused a massive stir as you and I were talking about before the show started was the Time magazine cover, uh, with the Little Honduran girl that was crying and president Trump’s standing in front of her and the headline was welcome to America and w and it was completely misleading. She was, the little girl was never separated from her parents to begin with. It was all the, the manipulation of the photo and the spin that was put on it by the organization that put out the article and it was to stir emotions and get people riled up. And I, I mean I, there, like I said, we’re trying to stay non political on this, but it just stuck. Like that frustrates me because the current administration wasn’t, the person administration would be doing this anyways. It’s been going on for 20, 30 years at the border. Um, you know when we, when we catch people sneaking in that country
Jill 00:09:15 in regards to that particular photo, the story behind the image, the end match for your listeners who might not know if you, if they search out Fondren girl, um, separated cover time magazine, I’ll find it. You’ll find the original. And that was taken by John Moore, Getty photographer and he with Getty and then they are disseminated to a variety of different publications and how people use them is really up to that public decent. One of the things that made this image so colorful and for the photographers out there, I really want them to be thinking about this because the image is striking because of the way can pose at night there’s headlights signing on the girl in the middle, right? Who’s wearing bright pink. It’s a wide angle shot and the adults are cropped up off at the hit. So as a viewer, you’re going, you’re being forced to look straight into that image and it has a lot of power and I’m most into it.
Jill 00:10:31 It brings the most in. And so what was leading and, and turn this into a symbol is the cutline in for me the information that a company did. Emmett was the misleading part and the photographer do in my opinion of good job of ciphering that and explaining that. And, and there are some articles from don discussing [inaudible]. His response was that it really wasn’t up to him or how the image ran. So he didn’t, you know, it’s not really his fault. And I felt that that was really not accepting responsibility for the impact that he had. And to me that also like he has his own personal agenda because if he was truly, um, documenting what happened, that information would have been in the cut. Right now, don’t get me wrong. This is a great picture and I think it would still be a great picture even if it was just about the hearts of people going over the border, if you know what a high, but it was manipulated into something out and that was really investigated by editors and people that are putting these papers and magazine time and really, really out of context.
Jill 00:12:06 And I think this is a clear manipulation of a political agenda and time and needs. We both have become much more political than there were, say 30 years ago where it really was being, they were both those magazines were giving us insight into let’s say, you know, domestic and international atrocities and, and, and bringing to light things that were going on because we didn’t have the internet and their responsibility in some ways was much greater now with, with us because of the Internet for many reasons, if you’re going to talk about, but they have to compete with all these other organizations. Citizen journalists don’t have the same ethics as somebody who’s been trained in this field and they’re tending to be more sensational rather than really going back to their roots with this neutral without bias first sides of the story. And that idea of the editor is something that I’ve been hearing in media for a long time.
Jill 00:13:25 News rooms are understaffed or they’re collapsing or happen, collapsing for ages, magazines, all of that. I’ve been going away. New firms or smaller, smaller photography departments. I think we may have talked about this from your other assets that are being wiped out. And it’s not that reporters are being told to document it with a cell phone. And so there’s not really that the, the lock dog within the news room to look out and say, hey, this isn’t quite right. You know, they’re presser for, and I’m not going to make excuses. I’m just saying how this started to come about, that the presser for immediacy is much more about the quickness than the quality. And that’s where it’s all happening, you know? And, uh, if an n paper article is going to get the quick hit is better for them to get those quick kids another story and then they can retract. Whereas in the old days it was like you were busted if you, if you had to retract that was a big, big thing. Now it’s becoming more and more commonplace and I think that’s really sad.
Liam 00:14:41 Oh yeah, exactly. And um, I think you and I talked about this, um, before, I don’t remember if it was on the previous episode or if we talked about it privately. Um, but one of the things I started doing a over the last year was I’ve been doing some content that I provide for free for the smarter Ishmael Light newspaper in Sparta, Georgia. And that’s a prime example of what’s happened to magazines and newsrooms across this country because Carly, the editor there, she originally had a staff of 40. Now it’s just her. So she’s the editor, the photographer, the reporter. She has to do everything all by herself. And it’s just sad that because everybody wants immediacy, instant gratification today because that’s the way society has gone now. You know, these magazines and newspapers had to try to compete with that. You know, they have to downsize. They have to eliminate staff, like you were saying. And the quality and the ethics behind their stories just gets swept under the rug, I guess. I mean, you know, 30, 30 years ago, 30 years ago, I would read Time magazine. I, the only thing I’d use Time magazine or Newsweek for today would be to start a fire.
Liam 00:15:56 I tear the pages up and use it to start a fire or something. That’s about all I would use either one of them for anymore. I mean, and it’s, and it’s sad. Um, and one of the things, you know, you and I talked about in our email exchange and uh, I know I had this, this is question five, but you know, it’s like I was saying, I have not seen a, what I feel a genuinely honest news reporter or anchor, I guess you could say since Walter Cronkite, and that’s sad because you’re talking, he retired. Uh, what did he retire in the late seventies, early eighties. And I think he’s since passed away. But you know, there was a reason why he was considered the most trusted man in America because he didn’t have any bias or slant and his news stories. He presented the facts and let the viewer make up their mind for themselves. And at the end of every episode of CBS News that he anchored, he always ended every episode and the same way. That’s the way it was, whatever date it was that day. And that’s it. And it was up to the viewer to decide how they felt about things.
Jill 00:17:01 I think that’s a really good point in terms of our ethics have seen generationally in terms of not a leader media but as we, you know, have had more access to things. And you know, those days of everybody being private to now everything is public. That all of those things in terms of generating an ethic has changed so many things. And one thing that I want to point out in regards to your comments about well-served song sites is that many, many new broadcasters now have come from a political position. They may have worked in a political campaign, they may be married to people in political parties that are very popular, prominent. And so it’s very important that we check the background of our anchors, of our broadcasters, of the reporters, where, where did they work before. I do that a lot. When I read an article and I am starting to feel it going a certain way, I will search up that person and see where they had worked before.
Jill 00:18:25 Um, if it’s a new stapler or if it’s some kind of organization, often you will still have, you’ll have lobbyists. And I’ve noticed on other news organizations now they’re, they’re actually stating that they’re supported by another entity, a corporate entity. And we of course know that many corporate entities have a very clear bias. So being really aware that a lot of the presenters that you will see on pretty much any mainstream media, right? The big case in CBS, NBC, uh, CNN, they have, uh, quite a few who, uh, have retired from politics to become analysts. Right? And that’s the thing that we have to understand that either analysts or consultants or they’re not necessarily calling themselves journalists, but they are presenting themselves as, so it’s really the idea of, we’re talking about all this for me is that everyone needs to be aware of how resect your sources.
Jill 00:19:39 The news is not going to go away and we do need it. But you have to, if not as you have indicated, the trusted resource that we had in generations gone by. And even then, you know, there was always known if you late and as we discussed at the beginning of the show, you know, politics, images have been manipulated over time. And there’s a lot of them out there. I think the thing that it has become, so, um, disturbing is how prevalent it is and, and bringing attention to it. So the word fake news is a trendy word that people are throwing out a lot, not ask you, you know, what do you define as fake news? What is the definition of fake news and asked, you know, I would like, you know, you know about that some your viewers mean what, how do you define fake news? Because we are throwing that word around a lot and it’s important to know how many different forms that can comment. What would you say Leah, but in a back on you, what would you say? Definitely.
Liam 00:20:59 Well, I mean I consider an organization in an organization of fake news when I start seeing that manipulate their news stories to push up a particular political agenda or slant. Um, and we, and we talked about this a little bit before we started this episode and when we are casually chatting on the phone, um, so a big one and all of my listeners know I’m ex military. I spent 10 years in the army and uh, I was a weapons and explosives specialist and a sniper. So that’s what I did. And I’m a supporter of the second amendment. Now again, we’re not trying to get political, but I know it’s a hot button, a hot topic. Um, and what I hate to see is news outlets, no matter who, they are constantly pushing blatantly false narratives about guns. You know, the Ar 15 is an assault weapon.
Liam 00:21:50 No, it’s not. I can’t shoot full automatic. Oh Wow. And I saw just a, I don’t remember how long ago it was, but in the, within the last year, a local NBC affiliate in Florida, it goes out to a gun range. All we’re going to show you today how devastating an ar 15 round is when it hits a watermelon. And the only problem was it was obvious to a blind person. They weren’t using an ar 15, they were using that 12 gauge pump shotgun. So when you’re blatantly lying to the public like that in a new story, I consider you fake news no matter who you are.
Jill 00:22:24 That’s great example. And I think there’s a lot to that. One. There is the potential for eastern bias and pursuing an agenda. But I also think there’s another often there too that maybe not in this particular, but I think that reporters can be lazy and editors again, why are they researching me, what it should be called? I mean not the pretty great novel audio. Um, is this the information, right? There’s this difference then with the uh, intentional year of information for a, an agenda and then there’s myths and for Mason there could be some actual, right, maybe it’s as, as much as under or overestimating the crowd, right? That’s an honest, could be an honest mistake getting your name wrong. Things like that. You know, someone who has not been in the military for years or even that they gone well probably not know that the difference between, and you know, that’s probably an exaggerate a little bit of this information there, but that that’s also what’s happening. And that idea of labeling a rifle is less definitely weapon or however there is scribing words that are put into the sentence are really also very bloated in terms of about buyer. So cleaning, cleaning that language, time researching, okay, if you’re going to do it on gun, you really know what you’re talking about.
Jill 00:24:38 Fact that say a Craig Maggie Moon or engineer except that grade mag for a medical, uh, the American foundation for cancers. And so they’re kind of, um, putting things out there into a broad, general public that’s part of the problem. And it’s not only the lazy reporters and editors, it’s the lazy cool. And we become where you can place that, you know, hitting the like button on a paper, slap you or like, you know, um, whatever, whatever your, your agenda is. A quick emotional reaction to something is we are, consumers of the news are also guilty of the spread, right? So it’s up to us as consumers as there needs to stop that. Commonly you’re illiterate too, if it’s on Facebook or somewhere else and say, hey, do you know that this is actually not called an assault rifle? Do you know that, uh, you know, help people define the fast way a story is true? Yes. Because you agree with that.
Liam 00:26:19 Yeah, exactly. You know, and getting back to the, the gentleman I talked about a few moments ago, Walter Cronkite, I mean, I could see him today if he was still active in the news, you know, and one of these, you know, televised events, whatever kind of event it is, you know, when somebody’s calling an ar 15 an assault rifle, I could see him standing up and going, I’ve got a copy of Webster’s dictionary. And yeah, it doesn’t fall under the category of assault weapon. Cause I mean, Cronkite started out as a newspaper reporter, then eventually became a radio broadcaster. And then he was a war correspondent during World War II. So the guy had impeccable credentials. And unfortunately, unfortunately he was one of the last reporters, uh, news reporters on TV, especially to had, you know, they had actual credentials in a very long and distinguished career as someone who just strictly reported the truth, what was actually happening.
Jill 00:27:19 No, a lot of that too is not necessarily about the reporter, but that the organization that they’re working for, what are they allowed to do? I think there have been a lot of reporters out there that have dry to, uh, of, you know, be a neutral, be facile to for necklace sides of the story. And there’s a lot of hierarchy in, in news organizations as everyone should know. You know, it starts off with the little reporter down at the bottom, but I said, it goes all the way up through lots of different editors and publishers. And now we have a lot of publishers being, um, a lot of organizations I should say that are owned by corporations, but there’s Amazon and you know, uh, other social media that has in fact men in newspaper and Public Caisson TV England for example, Murdoch News. All those organizations are couldn’t glomerate. And we know with corporation the bottom line is business and, and with the shift of what happened with media organization and they’re out there to look for, for the money, focus of truth and transparency have not been the priority for so long now that we are hearing mostly in a pricey or, or democracy and not the thing that really, really concerned me. Uh, because look at, I have a 13 year old son, he have no idea that Walter Cronkite concept for me, well
Liam 00:29:15 Walter Cronkite
Liam 00:29:16 all right here,
Jill 00:29:18 no, he has no idea nor lower Willie’s problems. And so we have a lot of people growing up in this environment that we’ll know nothing else but what’s happening and, and that is really scary and that we’re not being allowed to make our own descendants on facts and defy and hate, which I think is really not what we’re about. And definitely not what the media should be about.
Liam 00:29:56 Yeah, exactly. And that, that was one of the points I was going to raise. And you, and you hit the nail right on the head is too many of our news outlets, you know, whether that’s the TV news, CNN, MSNBC or whoever, there are big conglomerates now and all they care about is their ad revenues. So they, they, uh, keep pushing the envelope farther and further to one political bias or another just because it gets some ratings and it gets some more ad revenue and they don’t actually care about the truth. And maybe it’s not necessarily the reporters that work at that organization that, you know, walk, stomp all over the truth and a story. They’re just doing whatever the higher ups are telling them because it’ll create a sensational news story and go viral and make them all kinds of ad revenue. And you brought up a very good point, um, with somebody like Jeff Bezos from Amazon buying out, what was it, the Washington Post he bought and yeah, he bought that out.
Liam 00:30:53 I guarantee he’s got his slant at that Organization for sure. And I mean there’s outlets, especially newspapers, we’re much better off when they were small, privately owned organizations. Now granted you had your larger city newspapers, you know, the La Times or whatever the case may be, but it’s just over the years, like you mentioned a moment ago, with more and more of these media outlets getting absorbed by bigger and bigger conglomerates, that all, all, all they care about is ratings and ad revenue. They don’t really care about whether or not the stories even get close to telling the truth. They just want something that’s going to get them more ad revenue.
Jill 00:31:32 Yeah, it’s pretty, pretty bad. I will say that I think they’re a relative amount of transparency. I mean it’s clear that uh, that organizations are left or right pretty pretty upfront and, and I don’t think people need to really look at art. I think they just need to be aware of it. So there’s a site called media bias or factset and they actually have a ratings on their websites or different organizations. And I encourage everyone to check it out and have a look through what they have on their website. They have a lot of different categories and they even clearly mark on their website. This is less bias. This is less than or by us. This is like, and so you can see when you click on one of those categories, all the different articles that will come up there. They’ll also tell you the rain, wet, wet, this particular organization being that as as last in terms of CNN, they have marked as, you know, not all the way extreme but left and Breitbart is all the way to the right, not extreme.
Jill 00:33:01 So I think those analysis are fairly accurate and I think there’s some folks are out there using media. I’m not really sure that would be a good place to go. Now what I want to also make sure everyone knows out there these sites that are out there and media buys, you know, um, there’s, there’s a few others out there. They also have their bias. And with as a media consumer being someone who’s media literate and able to recognize the things, it’s really good idea to, you know, when they have that about me or about us I should say go and see what is it saying, who are the founders, where did they work before? Um, and you’ll, you’ll get an idea. I think there is, although we’re so consumed with this word of fake news and it is everywhere with photo manipulation, he faces a really serious problem where, uh, people will take a video or a video and change the voice over, uh, can be something else and it looks very, very know this is, this is really, really scary of what could happen.
Jill 00:34:24 Um, to change a lot of things in our history, not just slides. Everybody go, go look at the sake. Um, there’s been great one of Obama and comedian Jordan Peele that really puts a good perspective on the potential for the dangers with this. But what’s important for us as consumers is being aware of where our news is coming from. And I think there really are organizations that are trying at, we trying out there to do some fat tracking to you know, label things that is fake, you know, have uh, you know, this is uh, you know, if it’s pure nickel, right, knowing that this was, this is a joke, you know, don’t get crazy on yourself without it, you know, this is a dope. I think being able to understand what kind of sites are out there and what kind of articles there are, who writing them, it’s really important for us to be able to know it’s fine if you’re going to read something, not do one side or the other. Neil aware of that. Take a pause, recognize that. Don’t look at an organization like CNN or Fox, whatever they’re writing or presenting in a way that’s presenting both facts and I think most people out there and how is it and not recognize that someone is talking to you and you’re agreeing with everything they say. That probably really one conversation and article. So my, my point, everyone out there is really no, that if you’re looking at something where it’s coming from and keep supporting it.
Liam 00:36:24 Yeah, exactly. Well, and yeah, there was another good one in your presentation that you sent to me, um, that I did want to touch on briefly. So you know, as everybody knows, um, we, they had the mass shooting that killed 50 people in two New Zealand mosques on, uh, was that March 15th of this year or last year? Trying to remember now
Jill 00:36:44 this year.
Liam 00:36:44 Yes. Yeah, yeah. I thought it was. Um, and then in the aftermath of the shooting, sober religious and cultural organizations in New York City hosted a demonstration on the 24th of March against Islamophobia and hate. But then someone else took the video and posted it on his Facebook when the misleading caption Muslim rally in New York demanding Sheree on rights in the United States. And people got all up in arms about this. I mean, you know, your, your article that you send to me has screenshots of some of the comments that people left on this and it’s just insane that nobody bothered. Do you actually do a little bit of research and find out that the video didn’t actually show what he was claiming when he reshared it on Facebook? That it was something,
Liam 00:37:34 It had absolutely nothing to do with implementing a new form of law and justice in the United States, but it had to do with trying to, to bring people together, you know, and yeah, and show support for all people of all faiths and cultures and to try to reduce the, the hate in the world. And I made, it was twisted and totally taken out of context and I guarantee the person that did it did it just to get their 15 minutes of fame on the Internet.
Jill 00:38:03 Oh, I think that particular instance worth much more than just the 15 minutes. I think that was just very situated. So simply give your, your, your is a little bit more contact with a video. That brand knowing I’m Muslim and it appears to be in New York, it was said that it was in New York City. So, uh, right there that kind of get people excited that this is happening. And actually I got information from someone who’s a verification journalist and this is something that’s really new, um, where people are actually journalists analyzing this kind of thing on social media and in the news and really diving into it and uh, decoding the images, the comments where it seen posted from, how it’s being used. They knew right away that because of the setting that this was in, and then they found other images from another protest, or excuse me, the same process, uh, where there were more signs visible and they can see what this, um, actual, it was a march. It wasn’t a protest, it was a march. And it’s Hampton. That thoughts are the one really excited about it was that it’s that Muslims rally in New York City demanding their share rear right. And it times 10,000 shares, 237 comments and they were not pretty at all. They were very, very ugly and hatred.
Jill 00:39:52 And in between those comments you would say, you would see other comments where people say, hey look, this is not real. We checked yourself and then people with black more, this is not real. Look at the, you know, trying to get people to stop. And uh, when the girl went back to find me, this, this person, it’s a made up person and I’m sure this was much more intentional than one guy going out and, and trying to stir up the hatred. I think this was, I don’t know who, um, you can guess or put your own, you know, reasoning to why someone would do this. But it really made a lot of people very angry and I fell into, I fell into it. I looked at that and I was like, no way. This cannot be true. And I probably did something, you know, interacted with it before I checked myself.
Jill 00:40:53 And on the same that I really am ashamed of that, but I got caught up in the immersion and I knew if there was something in it that always made me, it stuck with me. It wasn’t like that, you know, the regular posts from your friends, you hit liking, you never think about it again. That was something I interacted with. It didn’t feel right if it’s just something felt off to me. And when I talked to their a journalist and C had a lot of other examples that this was the first one that came up and I just, my heart, I knew that are near it. I knew that was her, I knew what was wrong because my reaction was so strange and, and that was a really, really good learning lesson for me. I don’t think I shared it or read it. I, I, and I, I don’t remember how I interacted with the purse, but I know it made me very uncomfortable and it just never sat right. And I want to encourage your viewers or your listener to take that minute to breathe and be like, Whoa, is this real? You know, because it’s very difficult to find online now.
Jill 00:42:19 It’s really difficult to find, but I can provide a link. Where are your views if they’re interested?
Liam 00:42:29 Oh yeah, absolutely. Yup. And I don’t feel bad cause I’ve fallen for this a couple of times on the internet myself. You know, where I see something that gets me really fired up and then I’m like, wait a minute, I’m getting this fired up about it. And maybe there’s something wrong here. Yeah. And then you do a little bit of research and you find out that, you know, the d image or the video is real, but the context or the captions included with, you know, were completely false.
Jill 00:42:57 Right. And I think that almost in some ways more dangerous than complete manipulation too. Sometimes you can tell, but if it’s only a word or two that is out of place or a very, you know, strong bird, uh, or a really misleading headline, that problem. Huge problem.
Liam 00:43:24 Yeah, absolutely. So one of the things I wanted to ask you about, um, and I, and I think we discussed this back when I was still finishing up my bachelor’s degree. Um, over the last couple of years, news agencies such as Reuters have switched to using only jpeg files for photo journalists claiming that it prevents image manipulation. But my question is how is it preventing image manipulation when there are plenty of people out there that have the Photoshop or editing skills to manipulate any kind of image. I was kind of positive, I was kind of puzzled by that decision by Reuters.
Jill 00:44:01 It is an interesting decision. Um, and the actual that policy and they’re actually saying that they want the images to be shot in daypack I believe though correct wording is an earth, at least the camera should have made a jpeg image onto the card so that there are people shooting in raw and jpeg. You know, it’s, it’s uh, um, used by that decision as well. And part of it might be that their initial reaction is finally thing right after you wouldn’t really have time to necessarily sit down and manipulate a photo and not only manipulate it, destroy whatever is in there that would show any indication. But that’s kind of the way I’m thinking about it. But I really, it is interesting. I think the reason is because it’s just happening so much. They have to make some kind of policy people to be more aware.
Jill 00:45:24 And I imagine that is probably more for, um, journalists, freelance journalists. You may have not had the training. I’ve kind of more of a, Hey, don’t do this, you know, this is the way that we want the files. I don’t know, does it really protect? I don’t think there really is anything out there that Sanford Tech, uh, accepted our knowledge, our art, there’s many, many things, um, that are come through the world press foundation and they change a lot of their rules as well where they’ve been manipulated. Um, and not necessarily, but for example, high definition, the poverty, more impactful when you look at some researchers and they don’t need any manipulation at all devastating or heart wrestling already. So a lot of that is happening I feel because of the ulcer. The photographers are competent and that is a problem, right? Because it’s starting out from that basic level of if you’re a photographer or something like that, what won’t you do?
Liam 00:46:59 Yeah, exactly.
Jill 00:47:01 That, that’s kind of hunger for erecting. He did a, an article, I think, I don’t remember the circumstances exactly. I believe it was in seldom or Russell and he was hearing a, a story on back workers I believe. Um, and grass, a couple having sex in, in the car, in the backseat of her car. And I turned out his cousin and his girlfriend but he labeled it meaning you know, a sex worker, which is a misinformation or not mixed information. Yes. Information. And the only reason that it was found out was that they looked at the image and saw that there was another light within the car lighting them up. So I can hear is not necessarily gonna find that it’s only someone who knows, hey, couple really going to be having sex with a light on. You know, that’s something that has to happen with humor and human interaction and you’re out of everything in that image to be truthful in terms of it’s a nickel surface representation. But then when we actually now are educated I as photographers and editors and look at it as something completely different and that is there, the education is there that are, there are editors that are able to do that. That’s hobbies. I think those are this or bigger rather than, you know, on the content and making it more not.
Liam 00:49:04 Yeah. And then the only other thing I could think of is a possible reason for Reuters, um, insisting on jpegs was getting back to what we talked about at the beginning of this episode. And that’s the immediacy. Um, so in order to get the story and get the photos out, you know, to press whether it’s newspapers or TV news or whatever, they need to be able to get the images as fast as possible. And you know, as I’m sure most of my listeners know that our photographers, raw files are extremely large. You can’t exactly, you can’t exactly upload those quickly to a, you know, to a server or whatever, um, for your editor to look at. Um, and I can understand that aspect because a, the company that I do real estate photography for, when I started almost a year ago, I shot raw. Like I always shoot everything wrong.
Liam 00:49:57 And just earlier this year they had me start testing and onsite program where they wanted us to start shooting jpeg. Um, now for our clients, the images have to be specific pixel dimensions, you know, length and height. Um, but based on what the clients require, I discovered, you know, hey, we can just shoot jpeg and do medium and a, the pixel dimensions are right about perfect right where they want. So we now do that. But the main reason why our, my company switched us through shooting jpeg with, so we can upload the images on site and the clients can get these houses to market faster. You know, they can get the, the high quality, high quality images on the a, what is it called, the a mls website system or whatever, whatever they use for real estate FMLS or whatever it’s called. Um, so that’s the big reason why we did it as a company, as we switched to, um, to do jpegs. So just so we can upload on site and get the images out to the client faster.
Jill 00:51:04 Yeah. Yeah.
Jill 00:51:06 All right. I think that has nothing to do with the changes that they’ve made as well.
Liam 00:51:11 Yeah, exactly.
Jill 00:51:12 Why soccer team.
Liam 00:51:16 Now, uh, one of the last things I want you to touch on a little bit because you do have a great presentation, uh, on it right here, um, are some of the types of bias that you can find and especially images.
Jill 00:51:32 Oh, that’s it. That is a really great question, especially in regards to MSN because many people will say, uh, I was there and got the Bat right and let Photoshop aside for a minute. But by your angle, your Lens, your perspective, you can still create an image that reflects a certain point of view. And, and really back what we’re trying to do as photographers. We’re trying to tell the story and so we’re experts in choosing that right angle, choosing the, the Lens, but the things that can also add to that kind of bias or the things that aren’t being included in that, you know, in that, in it. Um, great example would be you go to a processor mark, similar to what we just discussed. And there are two people at that particular march where you can make it look like there were, it was very intensive by focusing on those people and they’re, they on the other side, there’s a whole bunch of other people you could not even see those people and say these people are pro whatever.
Jill 00:53:02 And they’re really, you know, using biomedicine and not saying or other people on the other side of the road. That’s a bias and not that there’s information, you’re not providing all the information. The other way within this is of course it is the cot lines as the staff with the Hondurans but all, how is it being, um, what is the tax doctor company, right. I, I will live as a young photo journalist. I had some, I do have some of my own opinions of course, but I tried to keep them intact with one particular incident with, uh, with their politicians that I didn’t particularly like. And I didn’t very healing way. Right. And so I did, um, photographs or, um, doing anything that he wasn’t doing. And, but I made her, I didn’t make her, she was not looking her lovely self. And you can see that and this is not at all political see this with the images that are being used of Trump over and over and over and over again.
Jill 00:54:29 And if you think about the illnesses that people are taking or taking hundreds, thousands of them, you know, not every image on your card is going to be of him with his mouth open or his pan, uh, being overly orange or his hair flipping up to look like a few pay. You know, there’s plenty you can pick on in terms of his physical appearance. But to do that constantly is, in my opinion, a form of that spread of that, that lie. I mean there really every, every news organization that I’ve seen, both sides of the coin are doing it, you know, and you see it more often when it’s something that’s very negative and heated or third, you know, they still find the most absurd picture of the Trump to run with the most absurd headlights. So that just add the of, so that’s the, that’s also the editing.
Jill 00:55:36 So who you’re starting for, you’re giving them these often five or six Austin or per seat and you’re including all you’re giving them then the wacky ones, then that’s all they have to choose from. They have to use it and then it’s not that Trump, that’s everyone. Right. How you edit your images and you can, you know, do your, your viewers out there that are portrait photographers, they know exactly what I’m talking about with how you photograph appliance. You can make them look a million different ways, you know, but you know, in the under commercial photographer, you need to make them look good because that’s what you’re hired for. So journalists doing the opposite of that to me is a disservice. Yeah. How do you, yeah. How would you please subject where he placed them in the frame, what, how you use perspective. We’ll turn that all to be a part of the influence.
Jill 00:56:41 Right? So we know as photographers we don’t really want to see people from below, right? That’s not a very flattering look. But if you wanted to make someone not look their best and you wanted that to go out because you had a personal issue with them like myself and I’m admitting it, you know, I knew it was wrong when I did it and I’m ashamed of myself now cause I realize that one little incident from me, small little tiny paper, not that I, the start of in trend, like how much that is expanded. It’s so scary. I’m one little person 24 doing that right now. And again that’s where we at the potter for. You think of new paths to stop and make people stop and look at things properly. Right?
Liam 00:57:52 Yeah. I, I think we definitely need to start holding more people accountable for the content that they put out. And getting back to the, the what we were talking about at the beginning with the Honduran girl image that time used on there cover. I mean personally if I was John Moore, I’d have been all over that. That’s just me. Maybe, I don’t know. But yeah, if somebody me, well you know, the fact that the photograph we show used so far out of context, it wasn’t even funny. I would have been, I would’ve been going to news outlets and been like, ah, he no, this, this is not what I shot and maybe be an uphill battle. I don’t know. But yeah, I would’ve definitely, I would have definitely been miffed if my photograph was manipulated in that way.
Jill 00:58:37 But he did too. That it wasn’t manipulated. That was the real image. It was the task that made it for me.
Liam 00:58:49 Well that’s right. That, that in time Photoshop Trump into the image too. Okay. If you think about it. Yeah. Cause on the cover of Time magazine, it’s just a girl by herself and Trump standing in front of her.
Jill 00:59:03 Correct. Correct. Well, and I think it was more the responsibility of daddy images too, because we Getty, Getty, photographer, they have a certain responsibility in my opinion as well, upholding or editorial. Um,
Liam 00:59:28 oh yeah, totally.
Jill 00:59:32 And you’re right. I mean, um, the John Moore situation can be a variety of things. It could be, um, you know, like to encourage it or when they look on some of the articles that look forward, some of the articles that were written, um, it could be his own personal bias. It could be really about ego, right? Knowing that this image went this far, you have a very well known photographer and has had numerous words in the journalism world. So he’s at a level that, um, I believe he wants to maintain. So, and again, this is personal opinion. This is me reading into it and I would really, you know, I’m, we’re talking about right now, do your own research and, and on this particular picture, because this really is a great one to look at and analyze and see who you said, how they used it, how it was manipulated to this issue. Um, and w you know, why wasn’t there more about the, the truth coming out? I think in terms of actually the December mason that is out there, this one did receive a significant amount of backlash in the media to explain the situation. And I think that is a good start.
Liam 01:01:13 Yeah. Yeah. We just need to take it further. Like you said, you know, people need to research. They need to look into, you know, whether or not the person they’re listening to on whatever media outlet is an actual reporter or if they’re a pundant or whatever the case may be. Yes. You know, check out their credentials and see if they’re, they’re legitimately a journalist or if they’re just somebody that’s paid lackey is what I would call him. Um, but yeah, this is, I mean, this has been a great episode, um, a lot of great information that you shared and a lot of things for my listeners to think about. Definitely when it comes to doing research on anything, you know, like you said, if it’s something that gets you that fired up and maybe you need to step back for a second, calm down, do a little bit research and find out the truth behind the image or the video instead of just, uh, flying off the handle, if it affects you that much, you need to step back and take an honest look at it.
Jill 01:02:13 Absolutely. And and try to stop it and try to educate people on, you know, what’s happening with me to this podcast. I’m happy to provide more links. I can provide you with the links of places to look at and there’s tons of research out there. It’s not completely hopeless, but we need to have people like you and me and your listeners out there talking to. It’s happening all over the world. There are organizations that are coming together for the sole purpose of finding out fake news volunteers in small countries where their news is very, very manipulated or coming together and working on this. And I think it has to be fought by us, the consumer. And um, little by little is better than nothing and we have a very dangerous season of politics and I would encourage everyone to check your own bias. Check your own by.
Liam 01:03:23 Exactly. Well, I think this has been a fantastic episode. I want to wrap up this segment, but I did want to ask you before we end the episode completely. Uh, what have you been working on lately?
Jill 01:03:35 Oh, thanks. Yeah, I crossed a great story that I’m really excited to share. I am working with a woman that I actually met through toastmasters nephew and I highly encourage everyone to check it out. We’re going to need some that help you to become a better speaker and leader all over the world and every country. And I met a woman through that and through different meeting to my friend, her name is Rachel Macario and cubic creative and an entrepreneur and storyteller. And she also happens to be completely blind and has ever since he was a kid to do a travel documentary show. And me and my love for travel and documentary, we just clicked right away. So were working together to do a series of webinars was um, and possibly Kickstarter to document her adventures. We’re starting in Colorado going around to different locations to show her interacting with the community and people and really giving an audience more insight into uh, what it’s like to be Rachel.
Jill 01:05:03 And she’s an amazing woman who speaks seven languages, has four degrees and nothing will stop her. And she is very, very insightful in few people. And I think really can make people see a little bit differently, um, into themselves and with around them. By sharing her insights. I’m really saying we’re getting some video and I’d love for your viewers and listeners, I keep calling them viewers cause they’re photographers. So I know their viewer, uh, to follow up, follow me out. We’ll be doing our, um, shooting tomorrow at the Water Lantern Festival, which is where you take a deeper and it out with a little message on a relate. And this is actually her idea, you know, people say to where, I can’t see, why would you want to know that? But he had the can feel the energy of the light and the mood and so we’re going to go explore that together and she’ll be interviewing people about what they see and, and how that all requests on, on who we are as people. And I’m really excited about it. So thank you for after.
Liam 01:06:24 Yeah, absolutely. It sounds like some exciting work that you’re going to be doing there and I definitely want to hear more about that as it progresses. And, uh, any, uh, any links or anything like that that you wanna want to have me add to the show notes for this episode, I’ll be more than happy to do that because that definitely sounds exciting. Sounds like something’s going to be a lot of fun, Huh?
Jill 01:06:44 Absolutely. And you used to have rates on CVC. She’s going to do a lot of the video editing with time code and he has an Instagram page that he pictures and get them up there and sees is amazing and very, very inspiring love movies. And I mean, being a documentary photographer ending or documentary filmmaker and the blind person is super inspiring whether you’re sighted or not. So yeah, I think your, your audience will really enjoy seeing what we come up with. So thank you for asking me that. And I heard the, I can get more interest with it.
Liam 01:07:29 Yeah, absolutely. As a matter of fact, it might not be a bad idea to, uh, to have Rachel or Human Rachel both on an upcoming episode to talk about the project. Oh, that’d be so fun. Yeah, I think I’d definitely be an awesome idea.
Jill 01:07:44 He’s got a wicked sense of humor.
Liam 01:07:47 Yeah. Nothing wrong with that. But yeah, I think it’s cool that you guys are doing this documentary project. I think it would definitely be something I’d want to want to, uh, check out. I love that kind of stuff.
Jill 01:07:58 Great. Thank you. Thank you.
Liam 01:08:02 You’re welcome. All right, I’m going to go ahead and we’ll wrap up this episode or to about an hour and 10 minutes right around there. Um, which is good. Um, as I mentioned before, you know, I liked the interview episodes to be a longer format, 45 minutes to an hour, a little over an hour is perfectly fine. Um, and again, Joel, I want to thank you for being on the show, your second appearance on the show. You’ve been fantastic and I’ve got to see if I can get some of the other former professors on here. I haven’t had much luck getting any of the rest of mine yet, but I’m still working on it. Uh, we’ll see how it goes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I’ve got a few of them on Facebook. I just gotta get a chance to circle up with some of them. But yeah, it was wonderful to have you on here again and we’ll probably end up having you as a reoccurring guest, especially with this documentary project that you’re working on with Rachel. That sounds like something we should definitely have on the show. A good at lights discussion about the project.
Jill 01:08:59 Thank you. And thank you. It’s an honor beyond your show and I really, this is what I’m my topic that I absolutely love and I really hope that something like your podcasts and make a little bit of different than a little bit of our quarter of a world, the world by, by getting people to stop and think. So thank you for having me on and let me talk about it.
Liam 01:09:22 Absolutely. And thank you again for being my guest. And we’ll go ahead and wrap up the call here. I’ll let you get back to things, uh, out there in Colorado. I’m sure you’ve got things to do and it’s getting late on the east coast. So I definitely got things I gotta wrap up yet, but definitely, definitely send me any links you want me to share as part of the show notes too.
Jill 01:09:44 I will, I will. Thank you. Thank you all your listeners, viewers out there.
Liam 01:09:49 I appreciate it. All right, thanks Joel. You have a good evening,
Jill 01:09:54 right
Liam 01:09:55 bye bye.
Liam 01:09:59 well there you have it folks. Uh, that is the wrap on episode 37 of Liam photography podcast. Uh, which again the [inaudible] was photo ethics and photo ethics today and I hope you enjoyed listening to this show. Again, I want to thank all of my subscribers for listening, rating and reviewing and iTunes and anywhere else that you find the show. Also be sure to check out their Liam photography podcast Facebook group. It is a private group that you can join. You have to answer a question in order to be accepted into the group and that question is named the give the name of the host of the show, which is myself. You can either put Liam or Liam Douglas and that will get you in a, once you’re in the group, you are allowed to post your own original work, your own photographs. Uh, you can post up to five every 24 hour period.
Liam 01:10:48 You can either do them, uh, you know, throughout the course of the day, every few hours, post a new one hour, you can do all five at once and let Facebook create a little slideshow thing for you. Either one is fine. Please do not share other people’s photos, even if you have their permission that will get you banned from the group. We want you to only share your own original work and you can also ask for creative criticism critiquing of your work. Just by posting your photos with the caption, cc please, and myself or one of the other photographers in the group. We’d be more than happy to take a look and give you some constructive criticism on changes you could make to improve your or up your photography game. Alright, I want to thank all my listeners again and I will see you next week. In episode 38