They can also argue that they are ethical in the situations already listed. I agree that there are some situations where retouched photos are completely acceptable. Sometimes they can be used as art such as Halsman's photograph, The Dali Atomicus. There are also times when images are edited only slightly to improve their quality, for example by brightening or darkening a photograph. In these cases the image is not intended to misrepresent an opponent or product, damage a person's reputation, or lower one's self-esteem. However, manipulated photographs can be unethical if used to deceive, even if the changes seem minimal. An example would be the suspension of photographer Bryan Patrick from the Sacramento Bee due to minor changes he made to some photographs. A Newstex article addressed several people who thought the punishment did not fit the crime. They stated that, even if the changes were minor, “a news photo must represent the truth” (Ethical Photo 101). In order for the public to trust a news source to be honest about the big details, it must first be honest about the small details. Manipulated photos are not always unethical, but they can easily be used unethically to deceive, ruin reputations, and lower