Wartime photography has existed almost as long as photography itself, and navigating the line between exploitation and informing audiences has intertwined with that history from the beginning.
Photographers during the American Civil War sometimes moved bodies in the aftermath of grisly battles to facilitate clear-cut narratives in their images, trampling over what would now be considered lines of ethical conduct and producing shocking images that were not published in newspapers. A century later, photographers documenting the Vietnam War eschewed manipulation but produced images that have proven equal parts enduring and horrifying: A monk on fire; a man’s summary execution in the street; a 9-year-old girl screaming, covered in napalm burns.
Prior research has thoroughly examined how news organizations determine which side of the line any given image falls on, but how audiences view those same images has received less attention. Now, a new paper published in Digital Journalism by Associate Professor Keith Greenwood and his team shows that, even in an era of declining public trust in news media, audience preferences line up remarkably well with those of photographers and editors.
