I first started reading about photojournalism ethics when I was doing my thesis, and despite thesis burnout I’ve maintained an interest because how we choose to believe in pictures is just so darn fascinating.

Digital manipulation and “Photoshop” as a verb are recent innovations, but the concept has been around as long as we’ve had photography. (That’s why some of the most confusing Photoshop tools to young digital-age users are the ones like dodge and burn that are based on old darkroom techniques.) There are two main ways to make a photo lie: 1) Change the photo after its been taken or 2) say it shows something other than what it actually shows.

Example from both angles have been in the news recently, so here’s a roundup of good stuff:

• Errol Morris (he’s awesome) on the purpose of Iran’s missile manipulation, also including vintage Soviet comrade erasure photos. Back story. Morris’ awesome NYT blog. His original post that got me hooked.
• Poynter’s Kenny Irby interviews the NYT picture editor about how they chose to run a photo of a hurt child from Zimbabwe that ended up being mispresented. The child has club feet, but his mother lied with a more poignant account, depserate to get her son care. Original correction.
• Finally, this one isn’t about lies. It’s about repercussions of the truth, and basically what my thesis was about. Warren Zinn writes about wondering whether the picture he took of Army medic Joseph Dwyer at the beginning of the Iraq War contributed to Dwyer’s PTSD-related suicide.