Is it cheating?

So is it really Cheating?

Recently my Fiancee and I went to the Georgia Aquarium. While there I took a few images via my wonderful little IPhone. It was really me just enjoying the beauty and childlike wonder of the animals around me. However, also around me were hundreds of people, most with their own cell phone cameras, point and shoots cameras, and DSLRs. I did see a few people with “professional” setups. It reminded me of the photographers ethics on shooting animals. The debate asks, is it right to photograph an animal in captivity and present it as Wildlife photography. Or not saying that it was shot while the animal was in captivity, aka a glass box surrounded by lots of people and near a major airport. Honestly the coolest images of wildlife and animals are those that actually in the wild. This seems like a no brain-er, but it really is an issues. Are we as photographers misleading our viewers by showing them images of animals not in their true habitat.  Take a step back, what about all of fashion photography, advertisement, and even some “photojournalism” photographers. They all set up the shot to a point where even thought you as the viewer think it is real, it really is not.  Is beauty of the image in the image or how the image was taken? I wonder about this. Take the photo of the jellyfish in the recent Iphone upload, I did not travel to a remote island, take scuba lessons, buy an Nikons V camera, and chase deadly jellyfish, nope I purchased a ticket with about a thousand other people on the same day, and just waited until most of them had moved on to the next exhibit, while I “carefully” shot the image, on my phone, and the moved on to the whale sharks (my favorite).  So the question remains, is it the same if I shoot the animal in captivity or in the wild.

What do you think?