UPA Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

UPA - Essay Example As the essay declares a theoretical framework guides research and clarifies what exactly is the purpose of the research. Even though the research question tends to be misleading as the article progresses the purpose of research becomes clear. This research was based on a preconceived notion that the triage is higher when UAPs handle the emergency department. This can produce unbiased results. This also implies that the theoretical framework on the nursing theory constantly guided the author in her research. Not knowing what the real framework can be a problem. The author has used a developmental framework. This paper stresses that while the introduction of the subject tends to be slightly confusing in the beginning the problem has been properly highlighted in the text later. The flow of the subject is efficiently handled. Current and proper references used and cited wherever necessary. The author is not trying to prove that her preconceived notions were correct. The actual results are quoted which revealed that contrary to belief the triage time taken by licensed nurses or by the UAPs did not differ. It convinces the reader to remove this myth from the mind that triage is faster when nurses handle it. Issues have been well argued and presented. References have been cited from various books on this subject. The author still suggests another ‘study to compare the educational level of the triage nurse†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ implying that this has not been covered so far. At times the author tends to contradict her own statements.

Research paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 8

Research Paper Example According to the JCAHO, the tracer methodology is a process of evaluating the patient status, whereby surveyors select patients and use their records in order to assess the organizations compliance to the set standards (Joint Commission retrieved from http://www.jointcommission.org/about/JointCommissionFaqs.aspx). The surveyors are able to trace the kind of the care process that the patient received by interviewing the staff in areas whereby the patient was attended. The surveyor then follows up the treatment process and determines whether the health institution has complied with the Joint commission standards. The major intent of the follow-up is to ensure that all health organizations are delivering high quality and safe healthcare. The process serves the purpose of monitoring the patient attendance and assessing the services of the health care organization Apart from gauging the health care center, the surveyors also identify points of potential weaknesses in terms of the organizations performance. After identifying the areas of weakness, the surveyors may educate the staff in the organization and share with them the strategies used by similar healthcare organization who have achieved better standards. Tracer activities help in identifying compliance issues that are crucial in determining the organizations compliance to the joint commission. On average, a three-day hospital survey is expected to complete 11 tracers using three surveyors (Joint Commission retrieved from http://www.jointcommission.org/about/JointCommissionFaqs.aspx). The system requires that the patients selected as tracers are those who have undergone multiple and complex services so that most aspects of the healthcare are evaluated. It is mandatory that the surveyor request the permission of the patient before starting the process. Upon completion

Sourcing Funds from Venture Capitalists, Creditors, Bonds & Equities Essay

Sourcing Funds from Venture Capitalists, Creditors, Bonds & Equities - Essay Example Funds are collected with some business objectives to realize the benefits of current innovations in the form of product launch, market campaigns, investments in profit making financial instruments, funding running projects with assured returns (like government projects bagged against tenders, infrastructure projects, conflict-free projects that have realized large payments prior to funding), etc. and invest the equities thus built (as an outcome of profits realized from projects) into diversifications, expansions, new Plant & Machinery purchase, new business initiatives, etc. This means that the primary objective of funding should be to invest in profit making ventures that can increase the valuation of the assets of the company and hence result in profits for the investors & in the process improve of share holder value. Faure-Grimaud and Gromb (2004. pp986-987) presented that block of funds raised by a corporation is controlled by insiders for the purpose of improving asset valuatio n of the corporation by allocating corporate resources or acquiring new resources. In the process of increasing firm's asset valuation, the shareholders increase their own wealth as well but this should be viewed more as an incentive of the shareholder's tangible value-increasing actions and not as the fundamental objective of fund raising. Amihud and Garbade et al. (1999. pp453) argued that after a company has taken the debt, a conflict of interest arises between creditors, managers and shareholders. Managers are forced by share holders to maximize their wealth and in this process may end up maximizing risk taking activities. Example, shareholders may be tempted to invest the debt (rather than equity) in high risk projects that may maximize equity at the cost of debt at the cost of overall devaluation of the company. These conflicts call for effective corporate governance which requires lot of contribution by finance managers. They have to manage the compromise between creditors and shareholders by keeping the former satisfied with the investment portfolio while controlling the wish list of the shareholders. Sources of Funds available in Europe (including Croatia) Bottazzi and Rin et al. (2002. 239-244) reported the source of long term funding in Europe (Croatia included) as the Venture Capitalist funding from Institutional Investors (includes endowments & pension funds), corporations, financial institutions (includes primarily banks, insurance companies and fund raisers from capital markets), Government and individuals. Unlike US, Europe has shown dismal maturity when it comes to venture capitalism as compared to US. This is understood from the fact that the funding contribution in US is largely by Institutional Investors (shows the maturity of US markets) but in Europe is largely from banks that control a major part of the mutual fund industry. There are many bank funded companies in Europe (having operations in

Copyright Infringment Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Copyright Infringment - Research Paper Example The trademark infringement by U-Haul caused confusion, mistake and commotion through creation of an impression that its services and products were produced or distributed by PODS. U-Haul misused PODS trademark after it had unsuccessfully attempted to acquire it in 2007 and gained access to private data concerning the company. U-Haul argued that the manner in which it used pods was not associated with the unsuccessful acquisition of PODS while further arguing that pods is a generic term and thus the PODS trademark should have been revoked. Copyright infringement is defined as a use of work under the protection of copyright law without authorization therefore impinging on particular exclusive rights accorded to the holder of the copyright. According to the essay, cases of trademark infringement are usually complex and very expensive with the one associated with U-Haul and PODS having almost three hundred entries while at the same time being comprised of numerous orders, motions and dep ositions of professional witnesses. Such cases are decided in the basis of whether a normal customer can mistake the trademark for a different product (Packard, 2013). This makes such cases extremely challenging to prove since trademarks should be unique words and not descriptive words in order to make them easier to prove. The PODS trial focused on how the word pods is defined and used while assessing whether the company’s trademarks were protectable. At the end of the trial, PODS was pleased with the decision of the jury.

Hyatt hotel -entrepreneur Essay Example for Free

Hyatt hotel -entrepreneur Essay How does it feel to stay in one of the most expensive and most luxurious hotels in the world? How does it feel to have all sorts of amenities and numerous variations that enhance the quality and satisfaction of a client’s stay at a hotel? No, it is not too good to be true since the establishment of the Hyatt Corporation in 1957. Hyatt’s first property called the Hyatt House was built at the International Airport of Los Angeles. Currently, there are over 215 Hyatt branded hotels and resorts in 43 different countries around the world. Hyatt Corporations includes the Hyatt, Grand Hyatt, Park Hyatt, and Hyatt Regency brands. Hyatt opened their first overseas hotel, the Hyatt Regency Hong Kong, in 1969. It was later on in the 1980s when the Park Hyatt and the Grand Hyatt brands were introduced. There are hotels located in many culturally diverse rich destinations that attract not only families, but also business travelers as well. These hotels include sophisticated technology, leisure, banquet, and conference facilities, and state of the art technology. Hyatt Corporations are most known for their deluxe and exclusive hotels located in major and secondary cities throughout the entire world. This international corporation has brought about more than 20,000 jobs opportunities for many around the world. It has provided excellent customer services and as an international hospitality industry, they also hold conferences, banquet parties, and catering events. It was not easy to set up an interview with the entrepreneur of this Grand Hyatt Hotel, Hyatt R. von Dehn, but I was able to meet him in person at a conference that was held at Park Hyatt Los Angeles. In the end, I was able to catch his attention for the last ten minutes with my curious questions. Mr. Von Dehn briefly explained to me that when he originally began his own business, he was tired of working for other dominating bosses and he knew that it took money, which he had enough, to make more money. In the early stage of the business, he was not expecting to make a lot back on his revenues, but with the support of his family he was able to preview and share the vision of success with them. This brought out one of the main key points that he told to me focus on when it came to starting up a business: you have to be a self-motivated entrepreneur. A word of advice which he gave me was, â€Å"When you want to launch a successful business, it all depends on your own potentials and nobody else’s. † Make sure you choose to invest on something that you enjoy and that you are very passionate on. Every business established has numerous amounts of regulations and limitations that one must comply to. For Hyatt Hotels, there are a list of thirty different sanitary regulation, protection for the physical plant, and one of the most known would be the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). Hotels have to quality and comply with certain requirement which the government demands. These obligations may be related to certain fixtures that can vary from ceilings, walls, and flooring to telephones, water fountains, to cables. Sometimes certain regulation are not entirely necessary, however, Mr. Von Dehn himself stated that anything that will benefit the hotels and its customers is something necessary. Of course, it is more convenient for his Hyatt hotels to have fewer regulations, but he also admitted that as a result of these detailed regulations, it has allowed Hyatt Hotels to rank so highly in the hospitality industry. Currently, the hotel tax rate is 6 percent and all Hyatt hotel owners, managers, and operators must collect taxes from their guests. Taxes are applied to every sleeping room that is being rented out. Certain main cities and different countries can vary on tax rates for the hotels, but it can vary up to 7 percent. Mr. Von Dehn did not specify what benefits he received from the taxes, but one thing that he would like to change are the rate of taxes in major cities and various countries. Despite the fact that raising 2 or 3 percent on tax rates may not seem as much, when a busy hotel receives a lot of customers and clients, they also have to pay a higher hotel rate. Personally, I agree with him. I think that there should only be a specific tax rate for hotels that should be applied to most hotels. Like mentioned before, Hyatt is a private owned corporation that has many branded hotels and resorts: Hyatt Regency, Grand Hyatt, Hyatt, Park Hyatt, and Hyatt Resorts. Hyatt Corporations are located within the United States, Canada, and the Caribbean. International Corporations have Hyatt hotels and resorts overseas, such as China, Italy, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and much more. According to the financial statements for the Global Hyatt Corporation, it was recorded that in 2005, hotels and resorts employed over 88,647 employees. Hyatt Hotels provide its employees with significant and beneficial wages, healthcare, and pension increases every year. Employees that do not get tipped can range from having a wage increase from $12. 10 to $14. 60 per hour. Servers and the housekeeping department receive $3-$5 per hour plus tips, but when business is seldom, their bosses will increase their hourly rate to minimum wage plus tips. Working on a long contract, employees may receive an average 7 percent annual increase on their salaries. Hyatt Corporation, Inc – annual income statement December 2005 December 2004. Revenue $11,555. 00 $10,099. 00 Cost of Goods Sold $10,242,00 $9,015. 00 Gross Profit $1,308. 00 $1,084. 00 Gross Profit Margin 11. 3% 10. 7% Operating Income $555. 00 $477. 00 Operating Margin 4. 8% 4. 7% Non-operating Income $268. 00 $304. 00 Non-operating Expenses $106. 00 $99. 00 Income Before Taxes $717. 00 $654. 00 Income Taxes $94. 00 $100. 00 Net Income After Taxes $623. 00 $554. 00 Total Net Income $669. 00 $596. 00 Net Profit Margin 5. 8% 5. 9% *US Dollar amount in millions Hyatt Corporation has an economic profit in the year 2005 compared to 2004. To begin, there is no negative profit and this already showed automatic sign of profitability. Hyatt’s stocks are currently worth $47. 26 per share. They made a profit of over $1,456,000 from year to the next. Before when the industry was first established, business may no seem to go as well. nevertheless, it has been over five decades since its establishment and every hotel, resort, and vacation club creates a positive income and a profit. The competition for the hotel industry is always tight and competitive. Certain competitors include the Marriot Hotels, Sheraton Hotels, Ritz Hotels, and Hilton Hotels. Hyatt Hotels is a perfect competition where every hospitality industry fights for the beset positions and the highest ranking. This form of business does not perform neither homogeneous nor differentiated products since it is a hotel industry. For other firms to enter this business, investors must qualify for certain acts and requirements. In the long run the firm is continuously growing and economically profiting annually. I would definitely invest on buying Hyatt stocks because I know that their industry is yet to increase. I have stayed at Hyatt Hotels myself and I can tell everyone that clients and customers need not to worry because this five star hotel provides perfect satisfaction and quality to everyone. WORK CITED: Bulletin, Manila. â€Å"Hyatt Regency GM Farid Alain Schoucair: Living One Day at a Time. † 8 June 2003. Little, Rebecca. Lodging: Avoiding ADA violations that can cost you. http://www. lodgingmagazine. com/index. cfm? fm=Article. Detailaid=54 2006. â€Å"The Five-Star Stars. † Business Asia. Vol. 8: September 2000.

Framework for Safeguarding Confidentiality in Children

Framework for Safeguarding Confidentiality in Children When dealing with adults who lack capacity and children, a medical professional often has to make a difficult choice between safeguarding confidentiality and making disclosures to protect the particular patients welfare. CRITICALLY DISCUSS the extent to which the legal framework has so far succeeded when addressing the balancing exercise referred to above and whether confidentiality for these groups of patients is sufficiently safeguarded. Introduction: In this paper, through reference to the jurisprudence of the courts of England and Wales, the author will critically discuss the extent to which the law has managed to strike an appropriate balance between protecting the rights of children and adult patients who lack capacity, on the one hand; and, allowing medical professionals to make disclosures when such disclosures are deemed to be in the best interests of their patients, on the other. The structure of this paper will be as follows: First, the author will examine the legal basis for any rights to confidentiality and non-disclosure that are conferred on children and adult patients who lack capacity, by the law of England and Wales. Second, the author will identify the legal provisions and/or common law decisions which purport to allow medical professionals to act in contravention of these rights, when to do so is deemed in the best interests of their patients. Third, the author will perform a review of the jurisprudence of the courts of England and Wales to determine the legal scope of these justified derogations. Fourth, the author will perform a literature review to indentify the extent to which medical professionals, in practice, manage to apply their discretion appropriately. Finally, the author will review the various mechanisms in place, if any, to review the conduct of medical professionals and hold accountable any medical professionals who fail to adhere to the limits of the discretion conferred upon them by the law of England and Wales. What is/are the legal basis/bases for the right to confidentiality enjoyed by children and adult patients who lack capacity? 2.1 Children patients who lack capacity and their ‘right(s)’ to confidentiality: Before the rights of this select group of patients to confidentiality are examined, it is first important to define what is meant by ‘children patients who lack capacity’. In this context, we are referring to the ‘capacity’ to provide legally valid consent to their doctors or other medical professionals to disclose their confidential medical information to third parties. Under statute, a child patient will be presumed to possess sufficient capacity to consent in the regard the moment that they have attained the age of 16 years. This is provided by section 8 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969, subsection (1) of which provides: â€Å"The consent of a minor who has attained the age of sixteen years to any surgical, medical or dental treatment which, in the absence of consent, would constitute a trespass to his person, shall be as effective as it would be if he were of full age; and where a minor has by virtue of this section given an effective consent to any treatment it shall not be necessary to obtain any consent for it from his parent or guardian.† Of course, this is merely a presumption. A particular child patient may have characteristics which invalidate this consent, even though they are over the age of 16. For example, if they qualify as a person who lacks consent under section 2 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which provides that: â€Å"[A] person lacks capacity in relation to a matter if at the material time he is unable to make a decision for himself in relation to the matter because of an impairment of, or a disturbance in the functioning of, the mind or brain.† It matters not whether this ‘impairment’ or ‘disturbance’ is temporary or permanent[1], but assessments must be made on the basis of the actual decision-making capacity of the individual[2], rather than through reference merely to the type of condition or impairment which that child is suffering from[3]. Such assessments are to be made on the balance of probabilities[4], i.e. a child patient who is between 16 and 18 years old wi ll be deemed to lack the necessary capacity to consent if it is more likely than not that he or she is unable to fully appreciate the implications of the decision which needs to be made. A child over the age of 16 may also be deemed to lack capacity to consent when they are physically unable to provide consent; for example, if they are unconscious[5]. Similarly, the presumption that a child under the age of 16 lacks the necessary capacity to consent can be rebutted if, upon an assessment of the decision-making ability of that patient, it is deemed that he or she â€Å"[has] achieve[d] a sufficient understanding and intelligence to enable him or her to understand fully what is proposed.[6]† A minor who possesses this required threshold of understanding and intelligence will be said to be ‘Gillick competent’. However, it is highly unlikely that a child under the age of 13 will ever be deemed so competent[7]. In conclusion, in this paper, when referring to child patients who lack capacity, we are referring (1) to minors who are under the age of 16 but who are not deemed to be Gillick competent; and, (2) to children who are 16 or 17 years of age, but who lack the necessary capacity to provide informed consent, perhaps because they are deemed to fail the test provided by section 3(1) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005; or, perhaps because they are unconscious, and are therefore physically unable to provide any consent whatsoever. Having established the categories of patient to which we are referring, now let us examine the legal bases for their ‘right’ to confidentiality: One such legal basis is provided by the Data Protection Act 1998, which was enacted to give effect to European Council Directive 95/46/EC. This Act creates a legal presumption that personal data may not be processed unless it is lawful to do so[8], it is processed fairly[9] and certain conditions are satisfied. In regard to the conditions which must be satisfied: Schedule 2 and 3 of the 1998 Act provide a list of conditions and, in order for information to be processed in accordance with the Act, at least one condition from both sections must be satisfied[10]. These conditions will be discussed at length in section 3 of this paper, when we turn to examine under what circumstances a medical professional is lawfully justified to make disclosure when it is deemed in the best interests of a patient’s welfare. In regard to the requirement of fairness, in the medical context, Stauch et al (2002) write: â€Å"To be ‘fair’ the data must, in general terms, have been obtained from the patient honestly or in accordance with a legal obligation; the patient must have been told the purposes for which the information is to be processed; and the rules for providing access to the data subject must also have been observed.[11]† In regard to when it is deemed unlawful to process personal medical information, no definition of lawfulness is provided by the Data Protection Act 1998[12]. One can only assume that this refers to the legal requirements provided under the common law and also under the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides: â€Å"(1) Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. (2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.† In the recent case of Rose v. Secretary of State for Health [2002][13] it has been held that this right is conferred on all citizens, including children. However, from the wording of the Article, in particular Article 8(2) it is immediately clear that this right to confidentiality is subject to a broad public policy category of exception. The category of exception will be analysed in greater detail in section 3 of t his paper, when we turn to examine under what circumstances a medical professional is lawfully justified to make disclosure when it is deemed in the best interests of a patient’s welfare. In regard to the common law right to privacy, this right is based upon equitable principle and therefore a breach of this right gives rise to a civil law cause of action only. Similar, but distinct, from the law of tort, one of the requirements which needs to be established before a common law right to confidentiality can be deemed to have arisen in any given case is a duty of confidentiality. This might arise from a contractual relationship between the parties or, in the medical context, simply from the fact that medical professionals are duty bound to respect the confidentiality of their patients[14]. However, this duty is also subject to a public interest exception: In this case of W v Edgell [1990][15], it was held by Lord Justice Bingham, who provided the leading judgment in this case, that: â€Å"the law treats such duties not as absolute but as liable to be overridden where there is held to be a stronger public interest in disclosure.[16]† To what extent the welfare of a child patient who lacks capacity to consent can serve as such a ‘public policy’ justification for derogation of this duty by medical professionals will form part of the subject of discussion in section 3 of this paper, below. 2.2 Adult patients who lack capacity and their ‘right(s)’ to confidentiality: An adult patient will be deemed to lack capacity either where he or she is unable, physically, to provide consent to disclosure; or, where that patient is deemed to lack capacity in accordance with the assessment criteria established under section 3 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This group of patients enjoy the same rights to confidentiality as the children discussed in the previous subsection of this section of the paper; namely, they have a right under the Data Protection Act 1998 to have their personal data processed fairly and lawfully and only where certain pre-defined conditions has been satisfied; the right to privacy as provided by Article 8(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (but, likewise, subject to the public policy exceptions provided by Article 8(2) of that Act); and, the common law right to confidentiality. What is/are the legal basis/bases on which medical professionals are entitled to derogate from the right to confidentiality otherwise enjoyed by their children and adult patients who lack capacity, when derogation is deemed to be in the best interest of their patients’ welfare? In the previous section of this paper, we established that each of the various legal bases for the right to confidentiality and non-disclosure of children and adult patients who lack capacity are subject to exceptions. In regard to the Human Rights Act 1998 and also the common law duty to maintain patient confidentiality, the exception is one based upon considerations of ‘public policy’. In regard to the Data Protection Act 1998, the ‘exceptions’ are provided by Schedule 2 and 3 of the Act which set out a list of conditions, at least one from each schedule of which must be satisfied in order for a medical professional to be deemed entitled to disclose (i.e. ‘process’) the confidential information of his or her patients to 3rd parties. Let us now turn to examine to what extent ‘the welfare of these patients’ can be deemed a legitimate public policy justification for derogating from these patients’ right to confidentiality and also to what extent the conditions provided in schedule 2 and 3 of the Data Protection Act 1998 might be capable of being satisfied by considerations of patient welfare. Before we embark upon this analysis, it is important to remind ourselves of the practical circumstances with which a medical professional might be confronted when treating children or adult patients who lack capacity: First, it should be remembered that such medical professionals will not be able to ask these patients for consent, because they, by definition, are either physically or mentally incapable of providing such consent; and, second, in the context of children patients who lack consent and who are under the age of 16, medical professionals are required by law to involve the parents or legal guardians of those patients in any decision-making processes pertaining to the treatment of their children—therefore issues of disclosure to these types of third party are irrelevant[17]. Bearing these limitations in mind, let us examine the various categories of exception which operate to allow medical professionals to make disclosures in the absence of any consent (but not where consent has been withheld by the parents or legal guardians of the patients in question). The first point to note is that medical professionals are fully entitled to disclose medical information to other medical professionals who are also involved in the treatment of a child or adult patient who lacks capacity. Such disclosure is permissible under the Data Protection Act 1998 because one condition from Schedule 2 and one Condition from Schedule 3 are both satisfied; namely, the condition provided by s6(1) of Schedule 2 to the Act, which staes that, â€Å"[t]he processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject;† and, the condition provided by s8(1) of Schedule 3 to the Act, which provides: â€Å"[t]he processing is necessary for medical purposes and is undertaken by— (a) a health professional , or (b) a person who in the circumstances owes a duty of confidentiality which is equivalent to that which would arise if that person were a health professional..† Such disclosures are made in the interests of the welfare of the patient, although assessments do not need to be made on a case-by-case basis as it is generally assumed that disclosure across medical professionals is legitimate and that consent for such disclosures would not be withheld. In regard to making disclosures to other non-medical parties: The various exceptions identified in the previous section of this paper all depend upon derogation being justified in the ‘public interest’. In regard to Article 8(2) of the Human Rights Act 1998, the words â€Å"necessary in the interests of the protection of health or morals,† does seem to suggest that derogation on grounds of the welfare of a particular patient would be deemed justified. This has been confirmed by the courts in the case of Z v Finland (1998)[18]. In regard to the common law duty to maintain patient confidentiality, we have already cited the case of W v Edgell [1990][19] as providing authority for the assertion that this duty can be overridden by competing public interests. It is highly unlikely that the Courts would wish to undermine the decisions of medical professions in this regard; after all, medical professionals are best qualified to determine how important disclosure is in any given case and therefore whether the duty of confidence should be overridden. As Bainham (2005) writes: â€Å"[I]t is debateable how far the courts would want to question, retrospectively the clinical judgment of the medical profession.[20]† In regard to making disclosures to non-medical 3rd parties under the Data Protection Act 1998, while little direct guidance can be found within the wording of the 1998 Act itself, the General Medical Council (2000), at paragraph 27 of its official publication entitled ‘Confidentiality: Protecting and Providing Information’, seems to suggest that disclosure on grounds of patient welfare will be considered a justified processing aim under the Data Protection Act 1998: â€Å"Disclosure of personal information without consent may be justified in the public interest where failure to do so may expose the patient to risk of death or serious harm. Where the patient [is] exposed to a risk so serious that it outweighs the patient’s privacy interest, you should seek consent to disclosure where practicable. If it is not practicable to seek consent, you should disclose information promptly to an appropriate person or authority.† It must be noted that this guidance notes does not suggest that disclosure will be justified where the risk to the patient is only minor, but provides no insight into how to assess the seriousness of any given welfare risk. Of course, if death is a risk faced by the patient if disclosure is not made, then this will automatically be deemed sufficiently serious. The legal framework: How have the courts of England and Wales purported to strike an appropriate balance between protecting the rights (to confidentiality) of children and adult patients who lack capacity, on the one hand; and, allowing medical professionals to make disclosures when such disclosures are deemed to be in the best interests of their patients, on the other? Much of this analysis has already been conducted in the previous sections of this paper, when determining the extent of patients’ rights to confidentiality and also the extent of medical professionals’ duties of confidentiality to their child and adult patients who lack capacity. However, one key fact has been omitted: Throughout this paper we have seen how many of the exceptions available at law to patients’ rights to confidentiality depend upon a notion of the ‘public interest’. It should be noted that the courts have been reluctant to provide any categorical definitions of this phrase. Rather, they have approached the matter on a case by case basis, with pragmatism. Those cases in which the Courts have held disclosure to be in breach of patients’ rights to confidentiality generally have involved circumstances where information has been released for interests other than those pertaining to the welfare of particular patients. For example, in the case of X v Y [1988][21] Rose J held that the disclosure of medical information for the purposes of protecting other employees was not a sufficient ground upon which to invoke the public interest defence. In cases where the disclosure was made in the interests of that patient, particularly, then the Courts are therefore likely to be more willing to allow the public interest defence to succeed. This makes sense, when one considers that the Courts are generally concerned with the harm or potential for harm caused by a disclosure to the patient over which the sensitive medical information pertains[22]. The Courts and medical professionals should also take into account that it is in the public interest to protect patients’ rights to confidentiality wherever possible. As Leung (2000) notes, if the right to confidentiality is not protected, then this could have far-reaching adverse consequences on the level of healthcare which is able to be provided by the National Health Service—patients will be less willing to be open and honest about sensitive facts, and therefore it may be less easy to diagnose and treat such persons[23]. What, if any, mechanisms are in place to review the conduct of medical professionals and hold accountable any medical professionals who fail to adhere to the limits of the discretion conferred upon them by the law of England and Wales? Of course, the primary mechanism which is in place is the right to private law action which patients are entitled to pursue in the event of a perceived breach of their data protection or privacy rights. The result of such actions will depend upon whether or not, in any given case, the court deems it appropriate to allow the defendant medical professional(s) to enjoy the protection afforded by the public interest defence. As we have argued in the previous section of this paper, where the reasons for disclosure were based solely on considerations of the particular patient’s welfare, then it is highly likely that the claimant’s case will fail. However, not every victim of breach will decide to take legal action and therefore it is not wholly appropriate to rely upon this mechanism to ensure that medical professionals remain compliant with their data protection and confidentiality duties. That having been said, this author can find no evidence of any other mechanisms which have been developed to measure compliance in this regard. Conclusions: The statement at the top of this paper suggests that it is difficult for medical professionals to decide whether or not to disclose personal information of children and adult patients who lack capacity to 3rd parties, when to do so is in the interests of the welfare of their particular patients. In fact, as we have seen, so long as the interests contemplated really are based upon considerations of patient welfare, then this decision is not a difficult one at all: Disclosure is such cases should be made. The fact that the patients themselves are unable to provide consent or, more importantly, withhold it, makes this assessment all the more easy. In regard to how well the law manages to safeguard the rights of children and adult patients who lack capacity to confidentiality: These rights are all, without exception, conditional and capable of being overridden in the public interest. While the Courts do seem to approach determinations of when the public interest defence should be allowed to succeed in a pragmatic and sensible way, taking into account the harm caused by each breach in question; it is arguable that some form of monitoring and accountability mechanism should be introduced at the practitioner level, to ensure that medical professionals are remaining compliant even where their patients, for whatever reasons, do not decide to take legal action for perceived breaches of their data protection and privacy rights. References: The Data Protection Act 1998 The Data Protection Directive, European Directive 95/46/EC The Human Rights Act 1998 The Mental Capacity Act 2005 Rose v. Secretary of State for Health [2002] 2 F.L.R. 962 Bainham, A. (2005) Children: The Modern Law. Jordan Publishing. Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1985] 3 All ER 402 GMC (2000) Confidentiality: Protecting and Providing Information. Available online at http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/current/library/confidentiality.asp W v Edgell [1990] 1 ALL ER 835 Z v Finland (1998) 25 EHRR 371 X v Y [1988] 2 All ER 648. Devereux, J., and Moore, R. (2002) Medical Law. Routledge and Cavendish Publishing, 2002. Stauch, M., Wheat, K., and Tingle, J. (2002) Sourcebook on Medical Law. Routledge Publishing,2002. Bailey, P. Harbour, A. (1999) The law and a child’s consent to treatment (England and Wales). Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review, 4, 30–34. Wei, G. (2002) An Introduction to Genetic Engineering, Life Sciences and the Law. NUS Press Publishing, 2002. Leung, W. (2000) Law for Doctors. Blackwell Publishing, 2000. Footnotes [1] Section 2(2) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. [2] The applicable criteria are provided by section 3(1) to (4) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. [3] Section 2(3)(2) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. [4] Section 2(4) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. [5] Not merely asleep! [6] Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1985] 3 All ER 402, per Lord Scarman. [7] Bailey and Harbour (1999) p32 [8] Schedule 1, Part 1, section 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998. [9] Schedule 1, Part 1, section 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998. [10] Schedule 1, Part 1, section 1(a) and (b) of the Data Protection Act 1998. [11] Stauch et al (2002) p282 [12] Ibid. [13] Rose v. Secretary of State for Health [2002] 2 F.L.R. 962 [14] For example, [15] W v Edgell [1990] 1 Ch 359. [16] Cited by Devereux and Moore (2002) p343 [17] As Bainham (2005) p330 writes: â€Å"But what of immature children who would fail the test of Gillick competence? Here, the obvious implication of Gillick was that the parent’s right to give or withhold consent would remain intact, and this has been confirmed by the later Court of Appeal decisions. Are there, then, any circumstances under which a doctor may act against parental wishes because he judges it in the clild’s best interests to do so? It must be said that, as the law stands, this would be a precarious course of action† [18] Z v Finland (1998) 25 EHRR 371 [19] W v Edgell [1990] 1 Ch 359. [20] Bainham (2005) p331 [21] X v Y [1988] 2 All ER 648. [22] Wei (2002) p95 [23] Leung (2000) p45

Documentary photography

Documentary photography Intro Documentary photography is extended form — that is, a work composed of a sizeable number of images. Some relation to text is a given, even if its only minimal, as in the identification of subject, date, and location; the text may in fact be extensive. There is no external time limit implicit in this form; some documentary projects have stretched over decades. For this reason, the documentary photographer is likely to have the opportunity to refine the project, not only through the analysis of the work-in-progress at various stages but even by the reshooting of unsatisfactory segments of the work. The elaborate nature of such projects lends itself to subjects that are seen as enduring; for much the same reason, the final forms they assume tend to be durable: the book and the exhibition have to date functioned as the primary embodiments of documentary projects, though certain audio-visual formats are serving this purpose with increasing frequency. The expose, the compassion and outrage, of documentary fuelled by the dedication to reform has shaded over into combinations of exoticism, tourism, voyeurism, psychologism, and metaphysics, trophy hunting – and careerism. It is easy to understand why what has ceased to be news becomes testimonial to the bearer of the news. Documentary testifies, finally, to the bravery or (dare we name it?) the manipulativeness and savvy of the photographer, who entered a situation of physical danger, social restrictedness, human decay, or combinations of these and saved us the trouble. Or who, like the astronauts, entertained us by showing us the places we never hope to go. War photography, slum photography, â€Å"subculture† or cult photography, photography of the foreign poor, photography of â€Å"deviance.† As I see it, the intentions of a documentary photographer are to record some aspects of reality, by producing a depiction of what the photographer saw and which portends to represent that reality in as objective a manner as possible. I believe we have already discussed in all sorts of forums the fact that photography per se, is tantamount to manipulation. That the impact of the lens selected, the film chosen, and all the other technical variables leave ample room to question the so called faithful representation of reality. So let us not mull over this one endlessly, as I think it thins the debate rather enhances it. The journalist is not some copier machine that simply reproduces mindlessly what is placed on the platen in front of her. He weaves and puts together the information in order to insure that it accurately portrays the information presented in a decision making process that supports the story being presented. As I have come to understand it, it has mainly to do with past traditions and customs. It apparently flies in the face of reason, that if one would alter an image, it no longer could call itself a document. What is wrong in that analysis is that any and all alterations have been treated equal (they are all bad). We know for a fact that not all alterations have the same justifications behind them, that some alterations can even contribute to enhance the veracity of an image rather than the opposite. Furthermore, many of the fears related to the conceptual changes for photography have to do mainly with a loss of certainty of what the photograph actually is delivering, in so far as a document, with little debate about the veracity of the content of a given image. We are of course dealing here with the same sort of ethical debates around editing a story, be that with text or film, even sound tracks, something everyone has been discussing for a long time. For photography it is no different. Why should it be? Since the 1980s photojournalism has been at a crossroads. Digital technologies do impinge on the routines, rituals, traditions, and behaviors of photojournalists. Digital technologies do require a variety of skill-sets that could not have been imagined a half-century ago. The photojournalist of the future will understand the ethical responsibilities that come with electronic digital manipulation. The rise of documentary photography does not spring from fashion. Rather its rapid growth represents strong organic forces at work, strong creative impulses seeking an outlet suitable to the serious and tense spirit of our age. The proof that documentary photography is not a fad or a vogue lies in the history of other movements in photography. Against this pattern of sterility, of ideas which could not reproduce themselves, we have the new function (and evolving from it the new esthetic) of documentary photography, an application of photography direct and realistic, dedicated to the profound and sober chronicling of the external world. To Lewis Hine, who thirty-five years ago was making photographs of child labor in sweat shops and textile mills, the vague tenents of pictorialism or the even less useful purposes of the photogram or rayograph must be incomprehensible. To the hard-working photographers of the Farm Security Administration, the somewhat remote and abstruse manner of the spiritual heirs of the Photo-Secession may seem too refined. To such a photographer as Berenice Abbott, setting down the tangible visage of New York in precise detain and lineament, the sentimental fantasies of a Fassbinder must be well nigh incredible. We have all had a surfeit of pretty pictures, of romantic views of hilltop, seaside, rolling fields, skyscrapers seen askew, picturesque bits of life torn out of their sordid context. It is life that is exciting and important; and life whole and unretouched. By virtue of this new spirit of realism, photography looks now at the external world with new eyes, the eyes of scientific, uncompromising honesty. The camera eye cannot lie, is lightly said. On the contrary, the camera eye usually does nothing but lie. But the external world is those facts of decay and change, of social retrogression and injusticeas well as the wide miles of America and its vast mountain ranges. The external world, we may add, is the world of human beings; and, whether we see their faces or the works of their hands and the consequences, tragic or otherwise, of their social institutions, we look at the world with a new orientation, more concerned with what is outside than with the inner ebb and flow of consciousness. The fact is a thousand times more important than the photographer; his personality can be intruded only by the worst taste of exhibitionism; this at last is reality. Yet, also, by the imagination and intelligence he possesses and uses, the photographer controls the new esthetic, finds the significant truth and gives it significant form. Body A new generation of photographers has directed the documentary approach toward more personal end. Their aim has not been to reform life, but to know it. Their work betrays a sympathy — almost an affection — for the imperfections and frailties of society. They like the real world, in spite of its terrors, as the source of all wonder and fascination and value — no less precious for being irrational . . . . What they hold in common is the belief that the commonplace is really worth looking at, and the courage to look at it with a minimum of theorizing. Contemporary documentary practice by photographers such as Fazal Sheikh, Simon Norfolk, Luc Delahaye, Paul Graham, Martin Parr and Pedro Meyer examine the social world with a measured sense of contemplation, challenging the traditional conventions of documentary photography in revealing a vision and voice about the real world. As I see it, the intentions of a documentary photographer are to record some aspects of reality, by producing a depiction of what the photographer saw and which portends to represent that reality in as objective a manner as possible. If we can agree to that description, I can already see our critics pounding on their desks accompanied by some degree of glee on their faces, as they suggest that this is precisely the reason why there is no room for the computer to be used in recreating documentary images. That the impact of the lens selected, the film chosen, and all the other technical variables leave ample room to question the so called â€Å"faithful representation† of reality. So why are so many people up in arms about the idea that a photograph edited in the computer is not really a true documentary representation? As I have come to understand it, it has mainly to do with past traditions and customs. It has been widely commented that much of the important photojournalism of the last several years has been done by amateurs — London Underground bombing, Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse, coffins of American soldiers coming from Iraq, young woman being flogged in Afghanistan, etc. And now, of course, there are the many images from Iran by amateurs which become even more critical as professionals are banned from the country. Instead of a single iconic photograph we will often be looking at imagery made by people who, as amateurs, are not schooled in the history of photography–they will be making imagery for information, not to replicate or create new icons. As such, their imagery will probably often be both more original and more awkward, but it may also make it more difficult to find the telling metaphors. In this sense, the imagery will be more modest and probably more credible. The need for professional photo essayists with deep understandings of specific cultures, both insiders and foreigners, is more crucial than ever. Somehow they must be paid for their work, and equally important is to find places for them to publish. Like writers and editors, photojournalists are held to a standard of ethics. Each publication has a set of rules, sometimes written, sometimes unwritten, that governs what that publication considers to be a truthful and faithful representation of images to the public. These rules cover a wide range of topics such as how a photographer should act while taking pictures, what he or she can and cant photograph, and whether and how an image can be altered in the darkroom or on the computer. This ethical framework evolved over time, influenced by such things as technological capability and community values; and it is continually developing today. News images shape our culture in ways both profound and deep. These photos have woven themselves into the collective memory of a generation. There are some who would even say that the mounting weight of photographic evidence was the primary cause for public opinion to shift against the war in Vietnam, and hence effected an end to the war itself. As such, to borrow a phrase from pop culture, â€Å"With great power comes great responsibility.†1 Responsible photojournalism means adherence to a standard of ethics. Photographic and video images can reveal great truths, expose wrongdoing and neglect, inspire hope and understanding and connect people around the globe through the language of visual understanding. Photographs can also cause great harm if they are callously intrusive or are manipulated. Ethics is an inherently subjective field. In his seminal textbook, Photojournalism, the Professionals Approach, author and photojournalism professor Kenneth Kobrà © writes, â€Å"Photojournalism has no Bible, no rabbinical college, no Pope to define correct choices.†8 There is no sole arbiter of what is or isnt ethical, and even if there were, the line isnt always black and white. Most texts regarding ethics in photojournalism focus on the issue of what might be termed â€Å"photographic truth† whether a particular image accurately represents the subject or whether it misleads the viewer. The National Press Photographers Association Code of Ethics states that the â€Å"primary goal† of the photojournalist is the â€Å"faithful and comprehensive depiction of the subject at hand.† Additionally, photojournalistic ethics might encompass the choices an individual photographer makes while shooting. For example, should a war photographer put down his cameras in order to help an injured soldier? If someone asks that his or her photo not be taken, is it ethical to photograph that person anyway? If ethics in photojournalism is about being â€Å"faithful and comprehensive,† is intentionally underexposing or poorly focusing unethical? Some of these questions sit on the line between journalistic ethics and professionalism. Utilitarianism as a philosophy attempts to weigh positives and negatives of a situation, and maximize the good for the greatest number of people. For example, if gruesome photos of a car crash offend the victims families, but shock the community into driving safely, then by Utilitarianism the taking and publication of those photos is deemed to be ethical. Photographer-centric ethics have to do with photographers choices at the time news photos are captured up until the photos are handed off to an editor. Whether or not to pose a subject, the question regarding what to do with a wounded soldier in combat, and how a photographer treats an image in the darkroom (or in the computer) are all matters of photographer-centric ethics. The method used to reproduce photographs on the printing press was not perfected until the 1880s, and it was not widely adopted for several more years. The New York Times, for example, did not publish photos until 1896. Though The New York Times printed its first photographs in a Sunday Magazine in 1896, the newspaper was not without visual imagery before then. Advertisements in The Times throughout the 1880s feature drawings and etchings, and those tools were occasionally used for news purposes. Though photography was known to many people and gaining popularity as an art form at the time, newspapers lacked the technology (and therefore the ability) to include photographic images as part of their reportage. This, however, did not stop some newspapers from hiring photographers and making use of their images. Some period newspapers employed both graphic artists and news photographers. This process was used at many different newspapers from the late 1800s to the early 1900s. The hand-drawn images were popular with readers, and publishers were loathe to switch over to the newer photographic technology. That technology, the halftone process, employed a fine screen that converted an image to a series of dots. When, at last, newspapers and magazines were able to regularly feature photographic images, the photos themselves were almost as much of a story as the news itself. Newspapers throughout the early 20th century are rife with â€Å"worlds first photo of † images. Around the turn of the century, smaller and less complex photo equipment started to become available. Celluloid film, first used for photographic purposes in 1888, was rapidly replacing glass as the substrate for photographic chemicals. This, along with Kodaks famous â€Å"Box Brownie† camera allowed more people to start taking photographs of their own. Among the public, the spread of amateur photography sparked by George Eastmans Kodak and other small cameras and the invention of faster lenses, shutters, and film led to a taste for candid, often close-up images with a sense of immediacy and spontaneity: the posed group portrait was obsolete in leading media by circa 1900. In the 1930s, technology started to work in the photojournalists favor. The Leica camera, invented in 1914 and marketed in 1925, gained popularity first with photographic luminaries such Robert Capa and Henri Cartier-Bresson, and then slowly with the rest of the industry. Thwarted by military censors from reporting the â€Å"what, where, and how† of World War I, journalists engaged the â€Å"who† the human interest stories that were already a staple of early 20th century media. These were cheaper and easier to file than hard news and analysis. they were also encouraged by the new light weight cameras and faster lenses introduced in the mid-1920s. These easily handled cameras performed in low light and could be used surreptitiously. If they did not give birth to the paparazzi as well as â€Å"street photographers those nimble observers of lifes odd encounters and human comedies they helped make spontaneous, sharp-eyed photojournalism a key language of modern vision. They changed the approach of photo reporters: no longer official observers beholden to those in power, photojournalists could be the eyes of the public prying, amused, or watchdog eyes. The split in U.S. society over the war in Vietnam and the controversy about it worldwide were reflected in media coverage, which in turn helped sharpen opposition to the war from around 1968. Photojournalism itself changed. The issues were too complex for neat photographic embodiments, and the war itself had few triumphs. While posing photos and staging news events had been taboo for some time, there was little precedent to inform photographers as to how and whether to render aid to their subjects during active combat. On one hand, helping a wounded soldier might have saved his life. On the other hand, â€Å"helping out† made photographers complicit with their subjects, and removed some of the distance necessary for journalistic objectivity. As photographic technology continued to evolve into the 1980s and 1990s, so too did photojournalistic ethics. The early 1990s saw the dawn of purely digital news photography. In the 1980s, magazines and newspapers started to experiment with incorporating digitized images into their layouts. Though some photojournalists were carrying laptops to remote places, setting up makeshift darkrooms, and scanning and transmitting film photos, the digital switchover did not start in earnest until 1992. With digital technology came digital photo manipulation. While the tenets of ethical news photography still held, there were notable breaches. Throughout photographys history, an unsuspecting public has been fooled by manipulated images. What is of concern to modern media watchers is the justifications used to alter images through computer technology not the fact that such alterations can be published without detection. The difference between todays â€Å"citizen photojournalism† and the aforementioned examples is the ubiquity of the imaging devices in modern society. In 2004, consumers bought 257 million camera-equipped mobile phones. By comparison, during the same time only 68 million digital cameras were sold.69 Millions upon millions of people are walking around with cameras in their pockets, waiting to become accidental photojournalists. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people in the general public are not aware of the nuances of photojournalistic ethics. Worse yet, there are people who actively try to dupe or trick the mainstream media into using ethically questionable (or flat-out fake) images. Not only can faked photos be misleading, they can have dramatic real-world consequences. During the 2004 election, it was briefly but widely reported that Senator John Kerry and activist Jane Fonda spoke at the same anti-Vietnam war rally. The accompanying photograph depicts Fonda and Kerry s tanding together at a podium. Nowhere was the power of citizen photojournalism more clearly demonstrated than in the summer of 2005 during the London subway bombings. On July 7, 2005, three bombs exploded on London subway cars, and a fourth detonated on a bus. Fifty-two people died, and some 700 were injured.74 Within minutes of the blasts, citizens began chronicling the aftermath using both standalone cameras and cameras embedded in mobile devices. While working photojournalists and other members of the press responded as quickly as they could, their still images were not as intimate or immediate as those taken by the affected passengers. Some of those passengers who took pictures with their mobile devices later uploaded them to photo-sharing websites like flickr.com. The next day, in a journalistic first, both The New York Times and the Washington Post ran front-page camera phone images that were taken by citizens, not by photojournalists.75 In describing the emerging citizen journalism trend, Dennis Dunleavy o f The Digital Journalist writes, â€Å"The future is here, now. The future came with the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, the devastation of the tsunami in the Pacific late last year, and now without question, London. The digital camera phone is the future and we have much to learn from this emerging technology.†76 Conclusion The great challenge here is to deconstruct previous templates so that they not be relied upon to continue the generic typecasting of journalism famine, flood, bombing, crime wave, accident, power figures, etc. A conversational media will begin with the humanity of the person (the subject), not their social ranking. Rather than being looked at by the journalist, it will be generally better to think of the subject as potentially becoming involved in the conversation. Since photography itself is only about 150 years old, this was not always the case. It would be impossible, of course, for â€Å"photojournalistic ethics† to predate photojournalism itself. While the concept of â€Å"ethics† has been around since the dawn of recorded history, photography has not. As of this writing, photography is still less than two hundred years old. It is fairly obvious that no ethical system could exist for any sort of photojournalism before photography was invented. This might appear to suggest an acceptable date from which to begin studying ethics in American photojournalism why not start at the beginning of photography? Even after Nicà ©phore Nià ©pce fixed the first permanent photographic images in 1826, it took several decades (and several inventors) before mankind had the technology to marry photography with text on the printed page. Photojournalism is a large and diverse field with very little consensus regarding ethics, even within small sub-genres (community newspaper photojournalism, for example). While most working press photographers should be aware of the consequences of ethical breaches, there is no â€Å"Photojournalists Hippocratic Oath,† no common Ten Commandments of ethics in photojournalism, nor are there standard â€Å"punishments† for ethical violations. Each publication and news organization sets its own ethical standards, which may simply come down to what it will tolerate, or what will sell more papers, in terms of pushing the ethical envelope. Sometimes these rules are written down in concrete codes of ethics, and sometimes they are simply the empirical sum of what is acceptable to the staff or a particular editor at a particular publication. Images in our pages that purport to depict reality must be genuine in every way. No people or objects may be added, rearranged, reversed, distorted or removed from a scene (except for the recognized practice of cropping to omit extraneous outer portions). Adjustments of color or gray scale should be limited to those minimally necessary for clear and accurate reproduction, analogous to the burning and dodging that formerly took place in darkroom processing of images. Pictures of news situations must not be posed. In the cases of collages, montages, portraits, fashion or home design illustrations, fanciful contrived situations and demonstrations of how a device is used, our intervention should be unmistakable to the reader, and unmistakably free of intent to deceive. Captions and credits should further acknowledge our intervention if the slightest doubt is possible. The design director, a masthead editor or the news desk should be consulted on doubtful cases or proposals for exceptions . After tracing the history of ethics in photojournalism and examining the state of those ethics today, one cannot help but wonder where photojournalistic ethics are going. Since nobody can confidently predict the future, the only option is to examine current trends and extrapolate. Certain issues are on the cutting edge of the present photojournalistic ethics discussion, and those issues are likely to play significant roles in shaping tomorrows photojournalism. Of course, without a crystal ball there is no way to be sure. From the invention of flash powder that made it possible for Jacob Riis to document the hideous conditions in New York tenements, to the Adobe Photoshop software that Brian Walski used to doctor his image, technology has certainly played a part in the evolution of todays ethical system. One might even say that technology has been the predominant influence in the evolution of todays ethical system (at the very least, but for the technology of photography itself, there would be no photojournalism). Likewise, technology will almost certainly be the driving influence regarding ethics in the future. Multiple factors will drastically change the ethical landscape. These include the further assimilation of digital photography work-flows into the newsroom, the improvement of consumer photo technology, and the omnipresence of photo technology including cameras in portable devices such as cell phones and PDAs. The shift away from printed material and towards electronic media for image consumption will also leave its own mark on photojournalistic ethics. Digital photography is the predominant means of image capture for American newspaper and magazine photojournalism today. Not only has it been that way for several years, the rate at which it has taken over is astounding. This bitwise blitzkrieg of sorts has brought with it new and difficult ethical challenges. In the â€Å"old days† before digital photography, images had a definite physicality. Photographs were fixed on pieces of film acetate coated in a chemical emulsion and developed in chemical baths. A photograph was something that could be held in ones hand. While not impossible, it was far more difficult to pull off a convincing photo fake. Twenty years ago, Brian Walski could never have doctored his image in the field. What might have taken minutes on his laptop would have taken hours, or even days, in a darkroom. Though the news cycle has sped up considerably since then, even two decades ago most newspapers and magazines couldnt afford that sort of delay before publication.65 Using Adobe Photoshop, the software with which Walski effected his fake, is more convenient, more effective, and easier than altering photos in a wet darkroom. Newer cameras and more powerful editing software both impact photojournalistic ethics, however sometimes that impact can be surprising. Since so much of the substance of journalistic ethics is about the process rather than the result, technology that enables new (or old) processes will automatically impact the ethical landscape. One recent example is the release of the Nikon D2x camera. The D2x is a professional caliber SLR with a unique feature it allows the photographer to create multiple-exposure images in the camera itself.66 Before digital imaging, most SLR cameras came with a switch that allowed the photographer to cock the shutter without advancing the film. This allowed the photographer to expose the same frame of film multiple times. One frequent use for this feature was to couple it with a motor drive, and take a sequence of photos that showed motion throughout a single frame. With the advent of the digital SLR, photographers lost the ability to use this technique in-camer a. For a similar effect, photographers could take a series of images and overlay them with digital editing software. Most publications, however, insisted upon labeling these images as â€Å"photo-illustrations† because of the ex post facto manipulation. The Nikon D2x restored the photojournalists license to create multiple exposure images. In addition to professional equipment, consumer and â€Å"prosumer† camera technology is also improving, and cameras included in mobile devices are starting to become more popular. Many of these mobile devices are networked (cell phones, for example), and are capable of transmitting images in near real time. During major news events, some photo editors are inundated with images from â€Å"citizen photojournalists.†67 Citizen journalism, of course, is nothing new. This widespread citizen media production and consumption raises an important question. With more and more people carrying cameras in their pockets, will the future have a place for the â€Å"professional† photojournalist? At first the question seems compelling for two reasons access and tools. In terms of access, it is impossible for a small cadre of trained photojournalists to be everywhere and to photograph everything that is newsworthy. There were no working photojournalists aboard the London bus and trains that were bombed, but there were people with camera phones. With each successive generation of camera phone improving in resolution and quality, the gap between the professionals tools and the citizens tools is closing, just as the ubiquity of those tools is increasing. â€Å"Professionalism,† however, connotes more than being in the right place at the right time with the right camera. In the photojournalism industry, professionalism means technical skill, news gathering experience, and of course ethics. Photojournalist Nancy L. Ford writes: A photojournalists job is to go out and experience life for others, to capture an event on film, and hopefully capture the emotion that was experienced, so the readers can see and feel what it was like to be there. The photojournalist must capture the truth, too. This means the photographer must only photograph what has happened, when it happened and not recreate a situation because they didnt get there on time. They must not move things around on the scene of an event to make the pictures look better. They must not alter their photographs on the computer or in the darkroom, like take an ugly telephone pole out of a picture. The photojournalist must also tell the truth, just like the reporter.77 [The] unsupervised approach may be even more of a problem with photography, because the meaning of an image can be manipulated through use in a false context, or no context at all. In the looting that followed the fall of Saddam Husseins regime there were photographs of US soldiers with arms full of money taken off the looters they had arrested, and which they were returning to an appropriate location. The same photographs could represent responsible people attempting to restore law and order, or ruthless invaders plundering the country that was their victim, your choice, depending on who you are and where you are. With technology enabling even the most unskilled amateur to take good quality photographs such misrepresentations are likely to occur more frequently. Not only will there be a greater number of images of any given event, but once theyre on the Internet they will be readily available to anyone with an agenda. Furthermore, amateur photographers dont have the same training as professional photojournalists, nor have they acquired the same experience and instincts.78 This professionalism, experience, and instinct is what ensures the existence of the photojournalist well into the future. Reportage has occured since the dawn of printed news, yet seldom is the place of the professional print journalist questioned. This is in spite of the fact that ordinary citizens sometimes have greater or more immediate access, and that many people carry pencils and paper (the tools of the print journalists trade). In the world of written journalism, professional journalists (who are bound by their own ethics) cull quotations from non-journalists. Absent blogs, nobody asks citizens to write whole news articles about what they witness. In other words, though recently The New York Times ran a camera phone image that was taken by a â€Å"citizen photojournalist† on its front page, it is doubtful that they