With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

AHA Sends Letter to NARA Archivist about Altered Women's March Photo

The AHA sent the following letter to the Archivist of the United States objecting to the alteration of a photograph on exhibition and praising NARA staff for acknowledging this serious lapse in judgement.

Dear Mr. Ferriero,

I write regarding the recent furor over the indefensible decision by NARA to substantively alter a photograph as part of the exhibition "Rightfully Hers: American Women and the Vote." The American Historical Association acknowledges and applauds your apology and admission that it was "wrong to alter the image." But the incident itself is disturbing: modifying a document on exhibition and thereby distorting the historical record. This lapse in professional ethics must be addressed as NARA reconsiders the policies and procedures that resulted in this serious error.

We recognize that exhibitions staff make choices about what historical artifacts to display and how to contextualize them. Once an object is chosen for presentation, however, the professional standards of historians, archivists, librarians, and other keepers of the public trust forbid its alteration, with occasional allowance for minor, non-substantive cropping for publicity purposes. Visitors must have confidence that what they are seeing is authentic. For the National Archives, the custodian of the official public record of the United States, to make such a decision is as inexcusable as it is unthinkable.

We also note, as NARA has pointed out, that the original photograph at Getty Images is available and remains unaltered. While we appreciate that the integrity of the original source remains unaffected, however, it is contrary to standards of historical scholarship to present an altered document as if it were historically accurate. There was no explanatory note to indicate what had been changed and why.

Click the link below or here to read the full letter.

Read entire article at AHA