Conference Presentation

1. How Can We Tell If the
Retouching Is Ethical?: An
Examination of Public
Acceptance as the Standard
of Photo Alteration
Qingjiang Yao, Department of Communication
Studies, Fort Hays State University
David Perlmutter and Zhaoxi “Josie” Liu, School
of Journalism and Mass Communication, University
of Iowa

2. Introduction
 The traditional assumption of “photography is evidence”
 Prevalence of photo alternation:
News photos: Brain walski’s picture for LA Times, Time Magazine’s
cover photo of O.J. Simpson, etc.
Entertainment and advertising photos: "I wish I looked like Cindy
Crawford”
“True photography: not corrected, modified or created by computer.”
 Reasons to examine photo alteration:
It is hurting journalistic credibility;
One picture is better than one thousand words;
Visual framing is much less studied compared to textual framing

3. Ethical Discourse
 Photos have never been reality; they are a “slice of
the whole” and “an inherent manipulation.”
 Symbolic Interactionism: an all party-negotiation
(Newton, 2001)
 The “Qualified Expectation of Reality”: the public as
the ultimate reference (Wheeler, 2002)
An photo alteration violating readers’ expectation is
unethical
An photo without alternation that violates readers’
expectation is also unethical
An alteration may make a photo more ethical

4. Hs & RQs
 H1: Public acceptance of photo alteration is high for photo illustration,
medium for feature photos, and low for hard news photos
 H2: Public acceptance of photo alteration is high for book cover photos,
medium for news magazine photos, and low for daily newspapers
 H3: Perception of the prevalence of photo alteration increases public
acceptance of photo alteration.
 RQ1: Will the public accept less photo alteration when a news media
outlet is deemed more credible?
 RQ2: What will be the influences of people’s Photoshop efficacy,
Photoshop knowledge, computer programming knowledge and digital
manipulation experiences on their acceptance of photo alteration?
 RQ3: Does using the Internet as main source of news influence public
acceptance of photo alteration?
 RQ4: Does experience of publishing a website influence people’s
acceptance of photo alteration?
 RQ5: Do people use different ethical standards of photo alteration on
themselves than on other individuals and on the mass media?

5. Method
 A convenient sample from
two classes (N=309)
 Variables:
Acceptance of photo
alteration in mass media (15
items, α=.86)
Photoshop knowledge (six
items, α=.75)
Photoshop efficacy (six items,
α=.87)
Perceived prevalence of
photo alteration (nine items,
α=.90)
News photo knowledge (three
items)
Media credibility (24 items,
α=.94)
Web publishing experiences
(three items)
Acceptance of other’s
alteration (six items, α=.79)
Acceptance of self-alteration
(six items, α=.84)
Digital alteration experiences
(ten items, α=.69)
Computer programming
knowledge (word, graphic
design, spreadsheet, web
design, HTML coding)
Media use (tv, paper, internet,
radio)

6. Results
H1&H2,
mostly
supported

7. RQ1

8. RQ2, H3,
RQ3 and RQ4
RQ5: no
difference in
acceptance of
self alteration
and others’
alteration

9. Discussion
 The findings of the variation of public acceptance across
photo genres, publication types, and media outlets with
different credibility may support the theory of symbolic
interactionism
 Major Moderators of Public Acceptance:
Media credibility
Perceived prevalence of photo alteration
Photoshop efficacy
Internet news use
 No difference in acceptance in self-alteration and others’
alteration, but difference was found in acceptance in
public pictures and private pictures.

10. Limitations and Suggestions
 The lack of sample representativeness
 R2 for the multiple regression model is only 29%,
which means that a large part of the variation in public
acceptance of photo alternation is still determined by
unknown factors.
 Future research may need explore what those
unknown factors are