Photographer Fired by AP Says Decision Was Fair, But Process Wasn’t

Courtesy of AP Photos

Courtesy of AP Photos

Freelancer Narciso Contreras, a talented war photographer who was cut off by Associated Press last week after he admitted he had Photoshopped a news photo, told PDN in an e-mail interview that he accepts his punishment, but said, “I’m critical when it comes to how the Industry handles the situation with individual photographers, especially when you are a freelancer.”

AP cut ties with Contreras publicly after the photographer informed the wire service that he had removed a video camera from a corner of an image of a Syrian rebel soldier taking cover during a fire fight. Contreras says he knew it could end his relationship with AP, but that he didn’t expect to be shut out of the process.

“I would have preferred to discuss with the editors the whole situation personally, [but] they went behind locked doors and made their decision.” He added, “As a photographer you should have the right to be included in the process.”

Contreras said he thinks AP also went too far in making its decision so public. “The public punishment seems more like an exhibit of power in order to protect [AP's] own interests,” he said.

Following is an edited transcript of PDN’s e-mail interview with Contreras.

Q: How did AP find out you had altered the photo? Did you tell them after they confronted you about it? Or did you voluntarily turn yourself in? And if so, what led you to do that?

A: I told one of the AP photo editors about the picture when we were working on selecting images for the [World Press and other photo] contests some weeks ago. I told the photo editor immediately when I saw the image on the screen. I didn’t hesitate in telling him, it just came up.

Q: If your own ethical principles required you to correct the mistake, why didn’t you tell AP sooner?

A. I was thinking all the time [about] that picture and I found the moment to explain [it] to the AP photo editor. Why not before? [For] the same reason that I submitted the altered picture, it was my wrong decision.

Q. Why were you retouching the image in the first place? Do you typically make the types of adjustments to your image files that AP permits, and if so, what are your usual adjustments?

A: I was conscious about the camera [in the original image] from the beginning. I couldn’t get the camera out of the frame when we were at the top of the hill and running down, away from the [gunfire]. I used a wide angle lens [because] the rebel [ie, the subject of the photo] was so close. [It was] difficult to work, under [fire]. So, when I got back to our base and tried to find a picture to describe the situation, I found this frame, but with the camera in the corner. It took me time to make the decision to remove it from the frame, but I did it.

I usually develop my images using the base process, RAW files toned and desaturated. The photo with the rebel ducking is my exception. I gave all my archives to the AP, almost 500 pictures, and they could see for themselves that this was a singe case.

Q. Do you know what caused your lapse in judgment? I am trying to understand: What caused you to cross the line this time–but not other times?

A: It took me time before I decided to take it [the camera] out. I recognize and assume the rules of photojournalism as the basis of my work, but I was weak at this point. There is no other reason, I broke my own rules. My fault was that I din’t contact my editors to ask for advice or try to get feedback from my very experienced colleague, who was with me.

I’m not trying to excuse myself, but it is not easy to be at a place where you are facing death every single moment, your mind and feelings are moved to another reality, far away from the one you are used to, [and] you perform like a different person. You can support long working days under tough conditions, your mind is set up to survive, and obsessively in the perfection of your work. This is the problem. We are obsessed about getting the perfect shot, that means you want to get the perfect shot under hazardous conditions. It is not worth [it] as a photographer, to come back with nothing if you risk your life [covering a story]. This obsession made the difference, and affected my decision to alter the picture. But I recognize that I made a mistake, a severe one, and a wish I could undo it.

Q. Did you understand when you made the alteration what the consequences might be if you were caught? In other words, were you aware of AP’s ethics policy, and the consequences of violating it?

A: I did know the consequences to alter a picture, and I did know when I told the AP photo editor about this as well, but at the time I told the AP editor I was looking to be honest for what I had done, and I feel this time I took the correct decision to try to repair my mistake.

Q. What do you think of [AP's] ethics policy?

A: That policy means to respect the credibility of the profession and the credibility of the service that all journalists and photographers are doing. So, this is the basis of our work.

Q. Do you think the punishment was fair? If not, why not? And what action by AP would have been more fair?

A: As I mentioned before, the credibility of our work is on the table when a single mistake is [made]. So, to prevent this kind of situation [from] happening again, and to protect the credibility of our profession I have to assume the consequences. But all situations and cases are unique and should be treated as such.

I would have preferred to discuss with the editors the whole situation personally, before they took their decision, but I have not had the chance to talk to anyone. They went behind locked doors and made their decision. This is a very critical situation, and accordingly it has to be analyzed and talked through with whom committed the fault. We are not disposable. They have to analyze every single case according to its unique nature.

Q. Our readers are divided about AP’s reaction to what you did. Some think AP was too harsh. Others expressed zero tolerance for altering news images, and think your punishment was justified. What would you say to them?

A: Zero tolerance is justified when it comes to altering news images. We must all play by the rules. But I’m critical when it comes to how the Industry handles the situation with individual photographers, especially when you are a freelance[r]. [For] editors it is not always easy to handle mistakes, but as a photographer you should have the right to be included in the process. Every single case is unique and that has to be taken in to consideration as well.

Q. What would you have said to AP? Is there an argument you wanted to make to them, to prevent them from ending their relationship with you?

A: They have the right to cut ties if you break the rules, but they should not have the exclusive right to manage the consequences of a photographer’s fault. Dialogue is the base to solve any single problem. If you are not allowed to talk when you are being judged by a company, there is something that is not working properly.

I do accept to break up the working relationship between them and me if I broke the rules, but the public punishment seems more like an exhibit of power in order to protect its own interests.

Q. What effect do you think this incident will have on your career? Do you expect to continue working as a photojournalist? If so, for whom?

A:  This incident affected my working relationship with the AP, and probably with some other media outlets, but nothing has changed for me in terms of what I assume as my duty in life, as a person and as photographer, to document what I perceive as the breaking moments for our history. I’m still the same person that I was when I got recognition for what I’ve done in Syria or anywhere else. I’m still in the same place where I was when I started collaborating with the AP.

I made a mistake, but it does not mean that the whole body of my work is lost. I have to restore my credibility, firstly by assuming that I made a mistake and sincerely apologizing for this, secondly by reinforcing the working relationship with the media outlets I work with.

As far as I can, I would keep on doing photography. This incident affects my way temporarily, not permanently. I believe in what I do in my life, this is my engagement and this is beyond photography.

Related:
AP Cuts Ties with Photographer Narciso Contreras Over Photoshopped Image

Tags: , ,

14 Responses to “Photographer Fired by AP Says Decision Was Fair, But Process Wasn’t”

  1. Darren Abate Says:

    I’ve been a professional photojournalist for twenty years, and I’m an AP stringer myself. Not altering your images is PJ 101. It was the first lesson taught to me as a young photo student, and it was repeated often and loudly that if you alter images, or subjectively alter a scene intentionally, you will be fired. Period. “Not being part of the process” doesn’t enter into it. The process is: 1. Break the rule. 2. You’re fired. It’s commendable that Contreras accepts his mistake and his punishment, but I don’t think there needs to be a “dialogue” about AP’s actions. They did what they should have done in terminating their relationship with Contreras, and then made it public in order to reassure readers that they are committed to ethics in journalism. Case closed.

  2. duckrabbit Says:

    @DarrenAbate

    ‘I’ve been a professional photojournalist for twenty years, and I’m an AP stringer myself. Not altering your images is PJ 101.’

    Nonsense. All raw files are altered when they are outputted as JPEGS. Then we have cropping, burning or just simply reaching forward and movng the camera before the shot is taken.

    When you enter a scene with a camera it changes.

  3. The case of the missing camcorder | A Persistent Vision Says:

    […] The PDN Pulse blog today has a conversation with the photographer about the […]

  4. flexible fototography Says:

    Another case of f**king “zero tolerance”? This “policy” is just an excuse to not think and not make decisions based on individual circumstances.

    The test should be: does the alteration change the truth of the photo, or make it a better image?

    This is not a case of moving a pyramid. As duckrabbit wrote, in a different situation, photographer coulda moved the camera out of the frame.

    We are in a whole nuther century, f’goshsakes; the old rules need to be altered to accept today’s reality.

  5. mbugua kibera Says:

    hi, am a photojournalist with the standard newspapers in kenya. first i would like to say that, it would have been good for the AP bosses to discus this issue with the photographer in private instead of ‘making it public before the world’. yes, that was a mistake of trying to alter a news image but i believe instead of AP ‘trying to exhibit their powers’ ( which has greatly damaged his reputation-publicly) it would have solved in by the bosses in a silent mode. besides the image- we must congratulate the photographer for working in such a dangerous situation an being able to show the world

  6. Tom Says:

    I think that it is unfortunate that with photography almost everything is post processed these days. Has everyone forgotten the days of film when photoshop was not available and efforts were made to capture the proper picture? Photographs are made with a camera, not a computer.

  7. Rod MacIvor Says:

    If the photographer had ‘burned down that area ‘ as a darkroom technique, it would have been legal. All photographs show what the photographer wants the viewer to see. The publicity hurts AP as much as the photographer…the public assumes ALL photos are manipulated…AP has re-inforced that impression. It should have been handled as a rebuke, not a firing…and what does that tell ‘free-lancer’…..we won’t protect you, we won’t provide back up, or security or fringe benefits, but we will fire you for covering up an unimportant part of an image.

  8. Lou Says:

    I understand that he broke the rule but in reality, the altered image did not justify the means of AP. They are guilty of discrediting this photographer for a very small alteration that changed nothing with what the image was trying to convey. They should have done this bend closed doors and left it at that.
    AP gets a lot of images from Getty. Do you really think that all those images that are bought are 100% unaltered. HA!!!

  9. Srihari Says:

    AP doesn’t understand photography. The very act of capturing an image is altering what is being seen. We can see almost 8 zones at a time, the best camera can only record about 3 at a time. Boom – your image is never accurate. Photography -1 (minus 1).

  10. John McD. Says:

    Over-the-top posturing by the AP. Would they have fired and humiliated a staffer like this? I doubt it. It’s easy to make an example of a freelancer who has no rights or standing. He is clearly a talented photographer, who acknowledged his mistake. Would it not have been better to have suspended him and counseled him, thereby helping both the AP and the photographer, and salvaging rather than derailing a career ? This is the photography equivalent of sharia, a disproportionate response to what the photographer did. As long as we’re on the subject of ethics, is it ethical for the AP to journalistically cover the NFL while also acting as the sales agent for NFL photos(http://www.apimages.com/NFL-photos)? Just asking…

  11. Tim Says:

    Replacing the distracting video camera with rocks in the photograph did increase focus on the newsworthy part of the image. But there is a huge problem with doing that: we should NEVER EVER have to wonder if those rocks were really there nor what they may be covering up.

  12. Friday Links | Exposed DC Says:

    […] Narciso Contreras, the photographer cut by the AP last week, spoke with PDN about what he saw as an unfair process. […]

  13. Aimee Says:

    Shame on AP! Narisco had been working with them for quite some time, and to condemn him because of a very minor alteration in removing a video camera makes no sense. It doesn’t change the mood of the image and if a video camera remained in the shot it would be a nuisance when viewing the image.

    Though curious to know how AP saw that the photo had been altered before they received it? Unless the photoshop was obvious, etc..

  14. The latest edition of Photojournalism Links - LightBox Says:

    […] Photographer Fired by AP Says Decision Was Fair, But Process Wasn’t (PDN Pulse) Narciso Contreras comments on the saga surrounding his dismissal from AP […]