Digital manipulation is very common in various types of work, from journalism, through the arts, to advertising.

But to what extent is digital manipulation acceptable? Faced with the various impacts that changes in images can cause, where is ethics found?

In this article, we talk a bit about the impact of digital manipulation on some markets and how it is possible to treat this issue more ethically.

Manipulating images is very easy

A Photoshop creation it was a true revolution in the photographic and graphic design market. The ease with which the program edits images is the reason for all its popularity to date.

In this sense, Photoshop opened doors to new creative opportunities for the visual arts, allowing artists to work on their ideas more “easily”.

However, despite this useful tooling side of Photoshop, what we couldn't predict was a darker side, where image manipulation could cause many negative impacts in the market and in society.

Based on this, there are many discussions surrounding ethics in the use of image editing programs, such as Photoshop and others.

Reading Tip: Digital Image - The Different Types and Formats

The impacts of digital manipulation

When we talk about problems with digital manipulation, we don't refer to the illustrations or conceptual arts who also use Photoshop. What creates an ethical debate are the edits of images for publicity and journalism, most of the time.

Publicity

In advertising, the biggest problem occurs in the markets of fashion, beauty and aesthetics.

Retouching images has always existed, even before the creation of Photoshop and other editing programs. The difference is that the process was more laborious and involved more resources and different techniques.

However, at the same time that the creation of software facilitated the process of retouching images, it also made it possible to make several other profound body modifications, such as stretching the legs and thinning the waist and nose.

In this sense, the manipulation that was previously used to hide an unwanted stain or pimple ended up becoming a resource for to mold people within a standard of beauty.

Models began to have their bodies and faces manipulated so intensely that the final result expressed a “beauty” completely out of reality. In some cases it even bordered on absurdity, as in the case of the Ralph Loren brand with the Filippa Hamilton model.

Shaping bodies for an unrealistic aesthetic has a very large negative impact on society, especially with the female audience.

Women already suffer from various aesthetic pressures imposed by society and when compared to fully manipulated model covers, they may end up buying mental disorders and harming one's own health in search of the “perfect body”.

Thus, manipulated images in the fashion and beauty market can contribute to the development of bulimia, anorexia, depression, and even body dysmorphic disorder, in which the person has a false perception of their own body image.

Many companies and movements emerged and were against the practice of exaggerated manipulation to disseminate a model of beauty and aesthetics out of reality. A very famous campaign was that of Dove, Portraits of Dove's Real Beauty:

Journalism

When we think of journalism, one of the first things that come to mind is the concept of Neutrality and truth.

However, we know that there are opinions, controversies, and points of view that end up being reflected in the media, and this includes news and information vehicles.

The problem begins to happen when news and manipulated photos begin to be made with the intention of Manipulate public opinion.

If ethics and Photoshop in advertising relate to discussions about aesthetics and beauty, in journalism the debate is about partiality and Purposeful lies. Although, not even politicians are free from having their images manipulated to improve their aesthetics, as happened with former French president Nicolas Sarkozy:

Therefore, as in advertising, the manipulation of images in photojournalism can have profound impacts on society and even internationally. In 2010, the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram manipulated a photo of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's meeting with the then President of the United States Barack Obama.

Fake News

Although it is not journalism, it is important to highlight the use of image manipulation for the dissemination of Fake News.

The purpose of Fake News is to manipulate the public, distorting facts and photos to make them seem true and, in this way, destroy reputations and create strength based on lies.

It's no exaggeration to say that the fight against Fake News is extremely important and this includes measures so that the software itself can identify which images have been manipulated or not.

Adobe has been thinking about Ways of how to combat and avoid this type of manipulation of images for Fake News purposes.

Reading Tip: Social Networks - We Need to Talk About Our Mental Health

Scientific Articles

Another situation, perhaps less well known, in which image manipulation is being misused is in the academic world of scientific articles.

Consultant and microbiologist Elizabeth Bik researched more than 20 articles in the scientific area of biomedicine and discovered that 4% of the papers had some type of adulterated or duplicated image.

The manipulation of images in scientific experiments has been contemplated since changes to the characteristics of the photos, how to reposition some elements, even selective cutouts and inclusion by data editing tools or non-existent evidence.

Because of this, a group of science communication companies created and published a document that deals with good practices in digital manipulation in academic articles. The document can be found on the website of Open Science Framework.

What is the limit of digital manipulation?

With all the problematic issues surrounding the manipulation of images and the use of tools such as Photoshop, the question that remains is whether we should stop using them or what is the limit of their use.

As a general rule, we can say that the limit for image manipulation is The truth and the intention. How much are we distorting what is real, in order to deceive or manipulate a certain group of people? This issue is especially relevant when we talk about journalism and scientific articles, which play the main role of informing and sharing knowledge.

On the other hand, the photograph itself is considered a visual art, and that is why it is more nebulous to apply the concept of “truth”. There are also those who say that no photo is a real representation of what was captured, because there are artistic intentions behind it, with less literal meanings.

In this sense, manipulation in photography may have a limit that concerns image quality. In these cases, editing software is used to improve image quality, delivering the meaning and intention thought out by the person who is shooting.

However, when we talk about advertising, the discussion becomes a bit more controversial because the photograph is part of a intent to sell and promote a product or brand, and it's not just something artistic.

Thus, it is possible to find advertising campaigns that manipulate images to establish unattainable standards - as already seen in this article - or to try to convince of the benefits of a product. For example: the manipulation of images on the skin of a model's face, in an advertisement for anti-wrinkle cream. In this case, it is clear that the manipulation had a persuading/deceiving effect on consumers.

Therefore, people who work with digital manipulation have to have Commitment to the truth and don't build images with bad intentions or second thoughts. In this sense, the ethos in this type of work it is very important.

Why talk about ethics?

Ethics is one of those words that everyone knows, but no one can explain exactly what it is.

There are many types of views on ethics, from various philosophers and thinkers. One that makes a lot of sense for the discussion about digital manipulation is under the eyes of Utilitarianism.

In this view, ethics consists of practices whose purpose should be to benefit the majority of people, putting your interests and those of the community first.

In this sense, to have ethics means to understand what are the consequences and results of your own actions. In this case, what is the impact of digital manipulation on people who consume a particular product?

Shares must value the wellbeing of the majority, and not just of a company, or some group of entrepreneurs who benefited from the sale of a product through a campaign with intentionally manipulated images.

One of the big problems is that there is no specific code of ethics for those who use digital manipulation or programs like Photoshop. Practically anyone can learn how to use and edit images with specific software. Thus, in these cases, ethics are always at the discretion of those who are manipulating and not under an approved set of norms and good practices.

Even though there is a type of code of ethics for advertising professionals, there is no specific rule for dealing with the digital manipulation of images, leaving the interpretation quite open for those who read.

Reading Tip: The Great Resignation - Why Are Professionals Quitting?

Regulation of digital manipulation

In view of the impacts that the misuse of digital manipulation offers, there is a Bill pending in Brazil, which requires the identification of digital retouching of models in advertising campaigns.

The idea is that the campaigns have more transparency and warn consumers about possible digital manipulations in advertising photos.

Other countries have already adopted similar measures like this, such as France And the Norway. In both countries, campaigns are required to place a notice on photos that have undergone changes or any type of manipulation.

Despite being an interesting measure aimed at protecting consumers, a question about this is valid: how much will requiring companies to post a notice of the type “merely illustrative image” really prevent misleading digital manipulations that, in any way, have an impact on people's lives?

We are bombarded with merely illustrative photos all the time — the photos of the menus of fast food hamburgers that say so. How much is that not playing with our imaginary and changing our perception of reality, even if unconsciously?