In our modern age, we find that telling truth from fiction is becoming increasingly harder and the opening ceremonies at the Olympics this year, being held in Beijing, China was subject to just a controversy. The broadcast of the opening ceremonies was praised by many broadcasters to be simply amazing. In recent weeks news has come forward that the actual ceremony and the broadcasted ceremony was two different performances. Part of the fireworks display had been prerecorded and on top of that was digitally enhanced. Though the Chinese government has stated that it was due to weather issues, they shot fireworks off days before the actual ceremony to make sure the fireworks would be seen appropriately for the actual broadcast. A spokesperson for the company that digitally enhanced the fireworks stated that many people couldn’t tell the difference, between what was digitally done and what was not. I admit the performance was amazing. Yet, if this story had not been reported, the general public and I may not have ever known that what we had seen was not real.  Granted the repercussions of this deception are minimal, and considering the legacy of fireworks in China, goodness knows they have a reputation to uphold.  The trouble is these are simple manipulations of the truth in images that the public perceives.  The moral nonchalance of the conscious exploitation of perception in humans is startling to say the least.  Or perhaps it’s the technological simplicity that is bothersome.

Doctoring images is as old as the images themselves.  There’s a famous photograph of Abraham Lincoln standing stoically with an American flag in the background that is prevalent in US history books.  However such knowledge is revealed that Lincoln’s head was placed onto a picture of a congressman, determined partly because the technology of photography was incapable of producing the picture at the time.  This shows us that traditional film isn’t perfect either, but today it is easier to manipulate with digital “film”.  With the ubiquity of digital photo enhancing technologies around the world and the accessibility of these technologies that the internet provides, can we even trust any digital image?  Should we trust digital images?
Iran, it was recently reported, digitally altered images showing the launching of long-range missiles to add an additional missile to the launch.  They digitally duplicated one of the three missiles launched to show a fourth.  The affect of showing four rather than three is probably negligible, but the use of digital doctoring from beyond entertainment purposes is alarming. 

Iran showing the missile launching is moved to both bolster nationalism at home and to be threatening abroad.  The decision shows the willingness of a government to alter images which may provoke a war is alarming.  What’s left then for a media-savvy, internet addicted, image inundated public?  There’s no indication to believe that the number of “authentic” pictures will increase.  The Supreme Court has not yet placed legality and limitations on media organizations to use these photos.  It seems left to the public to decide the capacity for truth that photos do indeed hold. This places a stronger code of ethics onto the individual photographer whether they believe they are representing historical truth or they are portraying an opinion. So the next time you see a photo on the news look a little closer and you decide if it is depicting truth or trying to deceive your perception.