VisualMente today reports on a Dallas Morning News graphic about a NASCAR hauler that was on the verge of winning a silver award at the SND competition when one of the judges noticed that incorporated into the graphic was the logo of NewTek, a company that makes the 3-D program Lightwave. The entry was disqualified. Judges say they thought it crossed an ethical line, and Morning News staffers say they were just trying to add logos to give the illustration a sense of the reality of a heavily sponsor-driven sport.

VisualMente has extensive responses, in English, from Jeff Goertzen, who was one of the judges, and Chris Morris, art director at the Morning News. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Jeff Goertzen:

At first we were all stunned, but as reality sank in, we knew the implications this would have on the entry. NewTek is the company that makes the 3-D program Lightwave and is the program of choice for many informational graphics artists in the newspaper industry, including the artists of the Dallas Morning News. In fact, NewTek is a co-sponsor of the Lightwave workshops organized by the Dallas Morning News and SND. As these facts surfaced in our discussion between our panel of judges and supervisors, it became obvious that there was a serious breach of ethics with this entry. Ultimately the graphic was disqualified.

Richard Curtis, USA Today graphics editor who was of the judges on the panel said, "If one of my artists had done this, he or she would have been fired."

I've always emphasized that informational graphics are every bit as much a part of journalism as the stories we print in our papers. Our work must be 100 percent credible. The facts must be accurate and the content believable. Can a graphic be libelous? Can it slander? Can it pleagarize? Of course it can. And this graphic by the Dallas Morning News was no exception to the rules of journalism. And the judges were in agreement with that.

What do you think about the disqualification of the graphic by the SND judges? Do you agree and understand their reasons?

We felt it was extreme. Giving "shout-outs" to friends, family, etc. in published work is not unheard of in the history of journalism, but it is not practiced here and would not be tolerated. In this case, it was an image that DEMANDED colorful, logo decorations and the NewTek logo was one of many we placed into the graphic. But we did not do so with any motives other than splash of color and corporate identity "feel".

If the judges felt we were attempting to "connect" with this software company, that is their choice. But there is also an Amoco logo on the graphic and we also added EDS, a local Fortune 500 company. We stood to gain nothing from the petroleum company and expect nothing from EDS. We simply needed logos. But because the software we used to draw the graphic happened to be NewTek's creation, there was a connection that was too close for comfort for the judging panel. Note: A close friend was a member of that panel, and he voted to disqualify the graphic. He said it was one of the better graphic pieces in the show, and it pained him to vote to eliminate the graphic, but he felt it crossed an ethical line. Again, I think it can be interpreted many ways, in varying degrees. But without any chance to explain, I think the image screamed exploitation to those who KNEW it was the NewTek logo, and probably extrapolated that we gained in some way by displaying the logo as we did. We did not. It was just readily available.

Regardless of what the judges say or feel now, the intent of including the icon was not something that could be considered since we had no way of knowing the artists' intent. Anything about intent was dismissed by the contest coordinator (me) on its face in the discussion. The judges were also asked to prove that it was the Newtek logo and given internet access to do so.

Basically the question of disqualification came down to this: Was it an ethical breach to include the logo regardless of intent or other circumstances? Knowing that inclusion of the icon was the only thing they could consider the judges answer was yes.

>Ethics Of Journalism Must Apply To Graphics (Jeff Goertzen) [VisualMente]
>About the Hauler graphic (Chris Morris) [VisualMente]