{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01734820322180917, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0012391573729863693, 'mean_word_length': 5.362204724409449, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Photojournalism’s ethics in the digital age of manipulation

Introduction: Historically, photographs have been altered by the tabloid press by cutting and pasting together prints or combining several negatives on a single print. Often the seams were concealed by painting with airbrushes. A trained eye could spot such manipulations, but with the advent of digital photography it became possible to manipulate images so subtly that the changes were undetectable. Content could be added, deleted or moved around inside the image. Several notorious cases of such manipulation occurred, particularly in the magazine industry. Leaders in photojournalism saw this new capability for seamless manipulation as a threat to the credibility of the photographic image and thus to the profession itself and reacted. (1)