Recently I served on a panel of a national journalism education group discussing the future of the documentary photograph. It was a lively panel with varied viewpoints. But I think most would agree, all supported the idea of documentary photographic evidence being valuable as historical reference. I spoke to the point that documentary images are visual truth-tellers and should not be messed with.

As I left I overheard one person say to another, "Yeah, Harris always says the same thing: Talk-up when you see photographs being misused in any manner. Nothing new."

Guess what? There is always something new. This time Time-Life provided the reason -- again.

Great Images of the 20th Century: The Photographs That Define Our Times, published by Time-Life Books. is the latest in a series of visual ethical blunders by the very leaders, and founders, of the modern, photographically dependent news publication. For some reason the editors of Time-Life's special books just don't get it. If the editors reproduce photographs that define our times, the images should be unmanipulated, original documentary images full of the truthful qualities that would deserve the title they gave the book. The title lies.

In the four-page introduction to the picture book, under the title of "The Informing Eye," an unnamed author exclaims that "the emphasis [of this book] is on the historic pictures that constitute a visual map of our times.... Rather than trying to find a picture to illustrate every significant moment of the century, we have concentrated on pictures that are great on their own terms, those that endure in our minds as icons of the time."

And then, on a following page: "(P)hotojournalism, which has richly documented the historic events of the 20th century, finds itself in some danger as the century ends, a victim of the same force -- technology -- that gave it life. Once the picture was an indisputable source of truth; now any photograph can be scanned into a computer and altered to provide a convincing image of a reality that never existed."

What purity of thought! What convincing evidence that we should believe in the documentary images we view every day! And all for naught.

Because on Page 13 the editors print a manipulated image of the famous Kent State photograph of Mary Ann Vecchio screaming as she reacts to the body of student Jeffrey Miller. Not only is it a manipulation, it is a manipulation that has been pointed out before as being a problem. It is a manipulation that has entered the mainstream passing itself off as the very untouched documentary image that the editors lament.

"So what?" some may ask, noting that the manipulation is merely the removal of a pole in the background near Mary Ann Vecchio's head. But that defense crumbles in light of the fact that anyone in the photojournalism industry, and certainly those at the magazines considered the progenitor of modern photojournalism, knew about the controversy associated with past problems with this very same image. One reason why the editors should have known about it is because the controversy involved other Time-Life publications.

News Photographer, official publication of the National Press Photographers Association, identifies this image as a damaged photograph. This is not an image with a clean history of publication. Because it has been abused in the past, and not corrected, it will now more than likely appear in the manipulated, abused form more often.

So here it is again. Time-Life is again caught not paying attention to the special qualities of the images that it is dependent on and speak so glowingly of.

In the past the editors have altered an image on the cover and interior of their special edition on the 150th anniversary of photography. They purposefully changed a documentary image of a historic meeting of President Reagan and Russian leader Gorbachev. Can anyone forget what they did on their cover dealing with O.J. Simpson? And on and on. These and other indiscretions, known or unknown, illustrate the rich history of Time-Life doing the opposite of what it claims in print it'll never do. The editors lie to us, their viewers and readers, and they lie to the craft of all truth-seekers. They apparently have no regard for authenticity.

This is a major problem looming over textbook authors who use photographic images to illustrate their words. Are the images you select for use in your text truthful to your intentions? Are the photos offered for publication, and often reused because of exclusivity, changed over years to suit the whims of editors and graphic designers? More often the answers are tending to be more dubious.

We owe it, as duty to our students and education in general, to provide the most accurate accounting of the information contained in our carefully crafted textbooks and academic writing.

We must be vigilant. Just as we are so careful to demand attributed quotes, and adhere to the documentary information contained in the quotes, we must also spend time vetting the visuals we use.

Sad to say, it is some of the largest photo agencies that have left no one as the gatekeeper to the responsibility of the truth-telling architecture of the photograph.

Some tips:

• Know what you are looking for when searching for a picture.
• Don't allow images that are changed in content to illustrate your well-researched words.
• Make a stand against the misuse of visuals that have been manipulated or changed in any manner.
• Search for images that will make the academic value of your textbook verifiable.
• Take a stand against the use of false, or manipulated, images.
• Don't let the cowards of Time-Life backpedal anymore on this subject.
• Object loudly when confronted by those who would belittle the value of the documentary photographic image.