For much of its history, photography was understood as proof. A direct trace of the world, a fragment of reality fixed by light. Its social, political, and cultural value rested for decades on that trust: what was photographed had been there. The image functioned as evidence.
Today, however, that relationship has broken down. Not suddenly, nor solely because of technology, but as the result of a deeper process that affects how images are produced, consumed, and interpreted. In the context of post-reality, photography has ceased to be a guarantee of truth.
To speak of post-reality is not to claim that reality has disappeared, but that its representation has lost stability. In post-reality, facts matter less than narratives, and images are no longer evaluated by their correspondence with the world, but by their symbolic, emotional, or ideological effectiveness. Photography, far from escaping this phenomenon, sits at its very center. It retains enormous persuasive power, but no longer acts as proof—rather, it functions as argument.
For a long time, the strength of photography lay in its indexical link to the real. The camera recorded a specific scene at a specific time and place. Even knowing that every photograph involves decisions, framings, and exclusions, there was an implicit consensus: something happened in front of the camera. That material basis sustained its authority. Today, that authority is eroded not only by digital manipulation, but by a deeper shift in the status of the image itself.
Photographic manipulation is not new. Since the beginnings of the medium, images have been retouched, staged, or reinterpreted in the darkroom. For many years, however, such interventions required technical knowledge, time, and resources. Today, advanced editing, synthetic image generation, and content alteration are accessible to anyone. The ease with which an image can be transformed has weakened its condition as evidence, but it has not diminished its power.
Paradoxically, in the age of post-reality images persuade not because they are true, but because they appear plausible. Credibility shifts from fact to appearance. A photograph does not need to correspond to a real event in order to function; it only needs to fit within a preexisting narrative, a shared belief, or a recognizable emotion. The image stops verifying and begins confirming what the viewer already believes. This shift has profound consequences in the informational sphere, but also in documentary, artistic, and personal contexts. Press photography, historically associated with visual proof, now faces constant suspicion. Even authentic images are questioned—not because of what they show, but because of who distributes them, in what context, and with what intention. Truth is no longer debated within the image, but in the frame that surrounds it. In this scenario, photography loses its traditional role as stable testimony and becomes one element within a broader narrative ecosystem. Images circulate fragmented, decontextualized, detached from their origins. A photograph taken in a specific place can reappear years later linked to a different event. What matters less is what it was, and more what it now represents. Post-reality does not deny the image; it repurposes it.
Social media have accelerated this process. Photography is consumed quickly, in isolation, without time for verification or critical reading. The logic of impact replaces the logic of evidence. An image that moves, outrages, or confirms an ideological position is more likely to circulate than one that raises doubts or demands context. In this environment, photography ceases to be proof and becomes symbolic ammunition.
Artificial intelligence adds a new layer of complexity. For the first time, it is possible to generate photographically plausible images without any real-world referent ever having existed. This is no longer about manipulating a photograph, but about creating one from scratch. This leap definitively breaks the automatic association between image and event. From now on, the question “Did this happen?” can no longer be answered by looking at the image. Photography stops being evidence by definition.
Yet the problem is not only technological. Even before generative AI, photography had already lost its status as absolute proof. Visual saturation, the repetition of iconic images, and the spectacularization of pain or conflict had turned many photographs into empty symbols. They were seen and recognized, but no longer informed. Post-reality does not begin with technology, but with the loss of critical attention.
In this context, insisting that photography must recover its function as evidence appears naïve. Not because photography cannot document, but because the cultural framework in which it circulates no longer supports that function. The image does not speak for itself. It never fully did, but today less than ever. Its meaning depends on the narrative that surrounds it, the medium that distributes it, and the viewer who consumes it.
This does not mean that photography has lost all value. It means that its function has changed. Rather than proof, photography becomes symptom. It does not certify facts, but reveals how beliefs are constructed, how symbolic power circulates, and how truth is negotiated in the public sphere. Reading photographs today requires less trust and more analysis.
For photographers, this scenario entails a different kind of responsibility. It is no longer enough to “show reality.” One must consider how an image will be interpreted, cropped, and reused. Ethics are no longer confined to the moment of capture; they extend into circulation. In post-reality, an honest image can be used dishonestly. Acknowledging this possibility is part of the work.For viewers, the challenge is even greater. Seeing a photograph no longer equates to understanding it. One must ask about its origin, its context, its intention. Visual literacy becomes essential—not to distrust everything, but to avoid automatic belief. Post-reality is not countered by rejecting images, but by learning how to read them.
Photography has not ceased to be connected to the world, but it has ceased to be a firm anchor. It no longer guarantees truth; it offers versions—fragments, perspectives. In this shift, it loses authority but gains complexity. The image stops being evidence and becomes a field of dispute. Accepting that we live in an era of post-reality does not mean abandoning photography, but redefining its role. Photography can no longer promise absolute truth, but it can offer something equally valuable: critical awareness. When images stop being evidence, responsibility shifts from the image to the way we look at it. And in that gesture, there is still space to think, to question, and to resist.
