The 8th clause of the
NPPA Code of Ethics, for visual journalists and those who manage visual news productions states that " One should not accept gifts, favors or compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage." This clause strikes a chord with me as the growing concern for those who run media organizations have access to edit and misconstrue the image a visual journalist may submit for publication.
It is one thing to have a blatant happenstance of someone trying to bribe you to make them "look" a certain way for the content of a story, however there is another question that lingers in my mind. How do visual journalists deal with this clause when the company they are working for becomes less objective and leans toward visual bias? The photographer, then, would be accepting compensation from their employer who has now influenced context. Maybe the image that is published isn't edited, but the content or tagline gives the photograph an entirely different meaning than the factual context.
This may happen due to an extensive amount of reasons regarding the operation of a media organization, but inevitably the decision to maintain stability within the company in response to the demand, leads to the influence of coverage. However, when one considers the fiscal reality of leaving a stable position with a company, entry-level or management, the risk can become personally overwhelming.
This aspect of reality seems like it may be one of the most difficult clauses to uphold in larger media rings. Thankfully, the National Press Photographers Association has created an entire circuit and network for advocacy and
resources, if there are continuous issues within media organizations, especially if there are issues regarding copyright material, constitutional rights, and other "issues affecting the industry." The preservation of a media organization that does not support the corruption of content is one of the most sincere and vital motives for keeping the public aware of truth in their communities and those who lead them. The acceptance of bribery, in hand with misconstrued information, strips the public of a resource in order to formulate independent reasoning from factual events.
The Code of Ethics ventures further into the concrete
Ideals of the Visual Journalist which continues to emphasize the integrity of the profession. The 4th ideal states that the visual journalist should, "Avoid political, civic and business involvements or other employment that compromise or give the appearance of compromising one's own journalistic independence."
This conduct is in lieu with the role of accepting compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage. For instance, if one were to accept an employment opportunity which demanded complete rights to the images procured, I can imagine that it would become very hard to defend the images under copyright laws. Whereas, if journalists do not work together to support the larger production of independent truths, then the public looses its voice and insight into events that affect the structures within their communities.
The Code of Ethics does not just apply to national or international level visual journalists. On a microcosm perspective, if I were to go into an event where a dean of Linn Benton Community College wanted me to document posed footage for the Linn Benton Commuter and he/she told me the entirety of my expenses were paid for the rest of my scholastic career, I would refuse. Even though no one would know that the footage was posed or planned, the information would become misconstrued. Perhaps, this became an issue and somehow my academic career was threatened. Perhaps it would involve the dean taking my transcripts and loading them into a potato gun. I would know that, outside of resources within Linn Benton Community College, I could also look toward the NPPA for legal resources and have somewhere to start defensive strategies.
