When it comes to photojournalism, I do not think there should be any photo manipulation. When pictures are taken for a magazine, journal, or newspaper, it is typically to back up whatever news story is being told. The stories that are being told should be truthful, although everyone knows there is usually some type of censorship or political agenda behind it. With stories that do not tell the "whole truth" and photographs that are manipulated, the reader gets a quasi-made up story. Below are some examples of extreme photo manipulation.

This is the same photograph of O.J. Simpson's mugshot on two different magazine covers. Clearly, his skin is edited to look much darker on the TIME cover. Why? Most likely to emphasize that he is black. This is absolutely ridiculous.

Another example is this ELLE cover of Gabourey Sidibe, from the movie Precious. Her skin color was edited so it was much lighter on the cover. This was a fairly recent controversy and ELLE took a lot of heat because of it. By editing her skin color, they are no longer representing the truth. 

My final example is this cover of a 1982 National Geographic cover. Clearly the photo manipulation is not as obvious as my other two examples but the pyramids were Photoshopped to appear closer than they actually are. If you went to Egypt, you would never be able to see this scene. Thus, this causes us to misconceive what Egypt may actually be like.







Anyways, I understand these are fairly extreme examples, but I think it drives the point home that if someone manipulate photos, they are no longer displaying the truth and journalism should tell us the truth.