“The Ethics of Visual Rhetoric & Photo Manipulation”

by Amber McDonnell | Xchanges 10.2/11.1

Analysis: Ethical Scope

Scope is another important facet of the discussion of ethics and visual rhetoric in technical communication. Alan Manning and Nicole Amare point out a gap in the literature discussing ethics and visuals in technical communication; they claim that ethics reach beyond “accuracy and injury.” According to Manning and Amare (2006), “Ethical concerns can arise when decorative or indicative elements begin to interfere with the informative purpose of a visual” (p. 195). Like Allen, Manning and Amare (2006) argue that ethical communication concerning informative subject matter must be accurate first, and attractive second. However, they go further to claim that editing, doctoring, or manipulating images so that they look more decorative or attractive, but detract from truthfulness, is unethical communication practice, and they cite the Society for Technical Communication’s ethical principles in making their argument (p. 196).

Manning and Amare (2006) also provide summaries of Elliot and Lester’s six approaches to visual communication:

• Categorical Imperative: Visuals should be consistent, impartial, and morally just in portraying subjects accurately.
• Utilitarian: Visuals should be useful and good for the audience as a whole, not just for the benefit of one or two individuals.
• Hedonism: Visuals should be pleasing aesthetically.
• Golden Mean: Visuals should not be biased toward one extreme.
• Veil of Ignorance: Because everyone is equal, visuals should not express prejudice or discrimination. (p. 196)

These ethical approaches to visual decision-making could be considered a general guide for those using images to gain “allies” or make an argument. In other words, any visual that is not meant to be considered decorative or fictitious is influential, and therefore should represent some variable of the approaches listed above in order to claim ethical best practices.

If we consider Latour’s assertions about power in visual rhetoric to be true, then we must assume that BP’s photos were meant to gain allies in order to achieve victory (an appeased audience). Doctoring images does not abide by the principle of categorical imperative (as the images are no longer consistent with reality) or the golden rule (as the communicators are seemingly “harming” their audience by being dishonest). With a foundation in the persuasive power of visual rhetoric, we can advance into ethical theory concerning the case.