was located in a public venue, whereas in Quebec
and parts of Europe the subject’s consent must be
obtained before an image is circulated.
The ethical dimensions are less clear and have not
been discussed in a systematic way. However, it is
likely that many of the issues Danto raises in his
discussion of portraiture apply in this context as
well. If we assume that persons have a right to con-
trol over their appearance in the same way that they
have a right to control over their bodies, then it
follows that a subject’s informed consent should be
obtained before their image is published. Informed
consent embodies two requirements: (i) the subject
must be told how their image will be used and, (ii) the
subject must understand the possible consequences
of such use. However, placing the burden of obtain-
ing such informed consent on a street photographer
would render the activity practically impossible. For
one thing, such photography often takes place in
crowded and fast-moving public spaces, making the
apprehension of individuals to sign consent forms
impossible. And even if such consent could be ob-
tained, it is unlikely that it would be obtained with
the subject’s full understanding of the possible con-
sequences of the publication of the image (often even
the photographer is unaware of these).
Thus if we take Danto’s concerns seriously it
may be that street photography is intrinsically
unethical. Many will resist this conclusion, object-
ing that there must be something wrong with an
argument that labels unethical many of the best
photographic collections of the twentieth century,
including Robert Frank’s The Americans, and
Henri Cartier-Bresson’s The Decisive Moment.
The matter remains unresolved and is ripe for sus-
tained investigation.
Documentary Photography
Much like street photography, documentary photo-
graphy captures images of individuals often, but not
always, without their consent. Further, these images
are presented as being objective, speaking to some
higher ‘‘truth’’ that justifies the use of individuals’
images, often rendering those portrayed as anon-
ymous, as in Dorothea Lange’s famousMigrant
Mother, Nipomo, California, 1936. While photogra-
phing a person on the street presents little opportu-
nity to identify that individual, Lange clearly was
capable of identifying her subject and in fact the title
contains the specifics of the place in which the
photograph was made, raising the inevitable ques-
tion of manipulation of the subject in an attempt to
structure a more dramatic emotional reaction to the
image. Likewise, August Sander’s portraits of Ger-
man ‘‘types,’’ which in order to create a social docu-
ment purposefully avoided allowing individual
identity, are often cited as ethically ill-conceived,
while simultaneously admired as striking and
important photographs.
The rapid rise of social documentary photogra-
phy with the Works Progress Administration and
Farm Security Administration and the illustrated
magazines that promulgated these images, such as
LifeorLook, combined to produce questions about
the ethical behavior of the photographers. A fa-
mous example was that of Arthur Rothstein, who
was accused of faking his striking image of a skull
baking in the wasteland of the Dust Bowl, and
stage-directing a shot of a farmer walking through
a dust storm with his young children. Rothstein
admitted to moving the skull and framing pictures
to delete or include points of reference in order to
make a more dramatic shot, a common practice
in documentary image-making, yet the contro-
versy around this incident seemed to arise more
from a clash of political ideologies rather than
photographic ones, a not uncommon occurrence.
Also of concern was the government’s goal of
obtaining images to promote social programs,
leading some to denounce the entire WPA/FSA
project as propaganda.
SCOTTWalden
Seealso: Adams, Eddie; Alvarez Bravo, Manuel;
Arbus, Diane; Brandt, Bill; Capa, Robert; Cartier-
Bresson, Henri; Censorship; Digital Photography;
Documentary Photography; Farm Security Adminis-
tration; Frank, Robert; Heartfield, John; Ho ̈ch, Han-
nah; Image Theory: Ideology; Klein, William; Lange,
Dorothea; Leibovitz, Annie; Levitt, Helen; Magnum
Photos; Nude Photography; Portraiture; Propa-
ganda; Rothstein, Arthur; Sander, August; Sontag,
Susan; Street Photography; War Photography; Wi-
nogrand, Garry; Works Progress AdministrationFurther Reading
Coleman, A.D., ‘‘Why I’m Saying No to This New Arbus
Book.’’New York Observer.
Levinson, Jerrold, ed.Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the
Intersection. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University
Press, 1998.
Malcolm, Janet. ‘‘Aristocrats,’’ inDiana and Nikon: Essays
on Photography. New York: Aperture, 1997.
Savedoff, Barbara.Transforming Images: How Photography
Complicates the Picture. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,
2000.
Sontag, Susan.On Photography. New York: Doubleday,
Anchor Books, 1989.
Sontag, Susan.Regarding the Pain of Others. New York:
Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2003.ETHICS AND PHOTOGRAPHY