| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Altered Image, Vanished Trust: Photojournalism in the Age of Digital Manipulation

Page history last edited by Tobias 8 years, 3 months ago

What are we to believe?

I think this will be an article of which they will tell us if the image is being manipulated or not.

“A rule has now been broken, and a line has been crossed.”

Based from the article that I have read these what they called altered image vanished trust photojournalism in the age of digital manipulation these are images that are altered by Photoshop or other software devices that could alter pictures based from my experiences about this Photoshop this is a very useful software to fool your teachers or professors that you were actually in the picture or these picture has been taken by you because you placed a specific item there or something like a requirement for a picture but these are all possible just by putting up an Photoshop software and editing it inside so in my opinion photo shopping is bad in many cases actually because it makes a certain picture invalid or lies for example you made a documentary about mutant birds but actually you just combined some picture of animals on a single animal using Photoshop or another example is using the picture of another person and using it to your own which is worse cause not only did you violate the law involving copyright and illegal use of invading someone’s privacy but you also violated the laws in illegal digital manipulation these are the laws that are imposed on and about copyright On October 3rd, the Philippines Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175) took effect and, with it, the country instituted criminal penalties for a variety of online acts, including spamming, identity theft and, most controversially, libel. However, the law may have had a somewhat unintended side effect - criminalizing some forms of plagiarism. The reason is that the new law adds penalties to “special laws” under the country’s legal code, one of those special laws is the Intellectual Property Code, which the nation’s copyright law is under. This, according to Department of Justice, means that plagiarism itself is not a crime but that plagiarism that also amounts to copyright infringement is. Such plagiarism now carries a penalty of 3-6 years imprisonment and a fine of 50, 000 pesos - 150, 000 Pesos 1,200 - 3, 60 pesos, if prosecuted under the law. However, Justice Secretary Lella de Lima was also quick to point out that this does not apply to copying news items or to works created by the government. The move comes shortly after a plagiarism scandal broke out involving Filipino Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto who was accused of lifting from five blogger, including at least two in the U.S. and from a speech by Robert Kennedy.  Sotto’s speeches, which were part of a heated debate on new birth control legislation, became the subject of national attention and criticism, which only grew after Sotto lashed out at his accusers, even saying that plagiarism was not a crime in the Philippines. Sotto was a legislation. Most nations have laws against plagiarism when it rises to the level of copyright infringement and many have “moral rights” laws that can add penalties for plagiarism beyond copyright. However, those laws are typically civil in nature and not criminal. In most nations, criminal penalties in copyright matters are reserved for cases where the infringement is of a massive commercial nature, such as with commercial counterfeit CD/DVD rings and high-profile online piracy cases. Single allegations of plagiarism rarely qualify for criminal action. Many have expressed concern that the new law could be used to stifle Internet freedoms in the country and some have even likened the restrictions to those placed by Philippine Dictator Ferdinand Marcos in the 1970s.The bill was signed by the nation’s President on September 12th and took effect October 3rd.Following the implementation of the bill, some 10 petitions have been filed with the Supreme Court in the Philippines seeking to overturn the law. However, an earlier attempt to obtain a restraining order barring the law from coming into effect was already denied.

5 things that I have learned:

  1. Copyright is bad
  2. Digital Manipulation is also bad
  3. Copyrighting but putting references is good as long as you quote
  4. Photoshop is not evil unless used for evil
  5. You could be fined if you altered an important image and posted it

5 integrative questions:

1. Is Photoshop really good or bad?

2. Can you Photoshop things as long as you don’t show it to anyone else besides yourself?

3.  Can you post an altered image and post it and label it as joke or untrue and not be sued by doing this?

4. How do we know if it is really altered how do we find out the real source of the picture?

5.  If the altered picture is for the better will it still be legal?

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.