Photojournalism Ethics

On an overcast, relaxing day in Florida, I decided to focus on a picture I saw recently of the Washington pitching phenom Stephen Strasburg. During his first appearance, photographer Jonathan Newton of the Washington Post delivered this photo (click link for photo and article on how it was done).

On first glance, it was hard for me to believe that this kind of effect could have been done in the camera, rather than in post-editing software like Photoshop.

Then I began thinking, if it could be done in camera, what difference would it have, ethically speaking, if it were done during or after he had taken the picture.

In photojournalism, I realize the ethical point of making sure that the picture appears unaltered. But if the end result looks the same, what’s the difference?

Maybe the issue I have is whether a picture like this should be used for an editorial purpose at all.

I see his point of "wanting to create a sense of energy that would capture the excitement at the ballpark" as valid. So is this nothing more than a creative use of motion blur in an effort to create something different?

-Daniel