CASE

During a primary campaign for the state Senate, you send out a glossy campaign brochure featuring a photograph of you sitting at a desk with the seal of the state hanging on the wall behind you. There is a credenza behind you that contains what look to be family portraits. It is a beautiful shot conveying competence and authority. You look like the officeholder that you wish to become.

When the brochure is received by the public, some individuals notice that the photographs on the credenza are actually those of the governor's family. This revelation leads to speculation as to whether the governor let you use his office for a political photo shoot in violation of state law and whether he was implicitly endorsing you. Your opponent has the photograph analyzed and asserts that the picture was digitally altered by superimposing a picture of you over a photo of the governor.

In your defense you claim that you don’t remember when the photograph was taken, but that you had been in the Governor's office many times as a citizen volunteer. You say that the photo must have been taken on one of those occasions. You disavow any knowledge that the picture was digitally altered, saying that the brochure was created by your political consultant. You say that if it was altered, it was done without your consent. You assert that this issue is just a smokescreen by your opponent to divert attention from the real issues facing the state.

What are the ethical dilemmas presented by this case?