Skip to comments.Reuters Admits Photo Fakery!
Posted on 08/06/2006 4:35:24 AM PDT by CraziemanEdited on 08/06/2006 5:09:15 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
click here to read article
Looks like the same false fotergraph to me.
Especially not when there is a war raging, and their side is losing.
I still don't think it is right. Look at the areas of lightness. Why fake lightness, unless it is a mushroom shape he was going for?
Al Reuters .....
'"Little Green Footballs had a run-in with Reuters, so they modified their site meter to record visits from Reuters... they had four online when I looked a few minutes ago."
Lol. Good idea.'
That was the great "Bungholio ( yes, means like it sounds ) or Bunga, Bunga, Bunga! affair:
They can't afford to damage one of their top allies.
Thanks. When I first seen that picture, I thought, "WOW! I didn't know Beirut was as populated as Hong Kong."
And what agenda is that? Looking at the photos side by side, I don't see how one makes any political point more forcefully than the other. One of my favorite maxims is "never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence," and this seems like a good case for that.
I once noticed -- and pointed out to the AP -- a pair of faked photos that were later retracted. They were faked by the U.S. Army. They were photos of two soldiers killed in Iraq, and appeared to be the photos from their ID badges. The soldiers had been photoshopped in front of a U.S. flag. There were harsh jagged lines around the silhouette job, and the flag background was pixel-for-pixel identical in both.
My best WAG -- and it's a pretty weak one, but as good as any I can come up with -- is that some newbie screwed up cropping the photo, and in a vast overestimation of his photoshop skills, thought he could fake the cropped-out parts rather than embarrass himself by asking someone up the line to resend.
The more I see, the more I'm inclined to believe that it was not the photographer, because Reuters had the unaltered version readily at hand. In any case, at least two people screwed up -- the person who doctored the image and the person who approved it.
The editors begin with bias in favor of Hezbollah and against the US. They are getting exactly what they want from their stringers.
Since Reuters has the original, I am betting that it was an editor who modified the photo rather than the photographer.
Al-Reuters contact information:
Corporate Marketing & Communications Director
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7542 7800
Global Head of Executive Communication
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7542 6005
Public Relations Director
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7542 2615
Head of PR, Research & Asset Management
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7542 0496
Head of PR, Enterprise
Tel: +44 (0) 207 542 6865
Head of PR - Media & Editorial
Tel: +44(0) 207 542 3436
Head of PR, Corporate
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7542 5211
PR & Corporate Events Manager
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7542 7457
Director Media Relations, Reuters America
Tel: +646 223 5223
Media Relations, Reuters America
Tel: +646 223 5596
Liam Hwee Tay
Head of Corporate Communications, Asia
Tel: +65 68 703 028
Friday, May 26, 2006
A Death Threat from Reuters (Bumped)
See below for important updates...
Early yesterday morning at about 3:00 am on the West Coast, someone in Sweden Britain connected to the Internet and browsed over to this article at the Guardian by Inayat Bunglawala, media secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain: This code could open doors.
Bunglawalas piece (about the Da Vinci Code) is in the section of the Guardian site where readers can comment, and someone posted a link to LGF as a rebuttal to Bunglawala. Our Swedish British visitor clicked that link, leading him/her/it to this post: Swedish Muslims Demand Sharia.
At 3:23 am, this creature used our contact form to send the following message with the obviously phony Hotmail address firstname.lastname@example.org and the subject line, You bunch of wankers.
I look forward to the day when you pigs get your throats cut....
Well, isnt that tolerant.
But this particular death threat is a bit different from the run of the mill hate mail we get around here, because an IP lookup on the sender reveals that he/she/it was using an account at none other than Reuters News
The Viet Cong was virtually wiped out, and the N. Vietnamese regular army was so badly defeated that the #1 general told Ho Chi Minh that they should give it up and come to terms.
I created a negative of the image and then adjusted the gama and it looked to me as though the entire smoke was "layered" over the buildings.
In May, a Reuters employee E-mailed a death threat to LGF.
Three months later, LGF busts Reuters for doctoring photos.
I don't know what you mean by "areas of lightness," and it's not easy to do any sophisticated photo analysis on a low-resolution, heavily compressed version of the image from Yahoo. If there were any shenanigans on the refed photo, it's subtle enough that it would take a higher-res, less-compressed version to nail down.
Sorry, but I still don't see the argument for bias or the motive here. Why risk your job to make a cloud of smoke look vaguely more mushroom shaped? I don't doubt the widespread existence of bias in the media (several different biases, actually), but some of the arguments are reminiscent of the folks looking for skull-shapes in the ice cubes in liquor ads.
Since AP, AFP, and Rooters were the media outlets allowed at Qana, maybe we should be going back and looking at a lot more photogs and their photos....
The photographer was the same one that took the pics of green helmet guy at Qana.
So when/how does that "photo kill" actually get served to a news consumer?
Why did Leni Riefenstahl ruin her reputation to shill for Hitler?
Giant Eddy of Iron Maiden fame is destroying Beirut!
Women and minorities were the primary victims.
"Could the pacifier on the baby be photo-shopped???"
Odd how the pacifier is so blue and clean when everything else is covered in dust.
If it weren't for FreeRepublic, who would have known? And who will pick this story up and get it in front of more people? Reason #1,299 to send a little cash during the next fundraiser.
If it fits the template the media is going by they're less likely to question it's veracity.
That is why I asked the experts to check on it. It could have been physically added or photo-shopped. We need to see other photos showing this child.
"Beats me why a photographer or editor would risk his job over that"
Thats just it, they haven't risked their job. The guy was only suspended.
Good point. Plus, when you use stringers, you have no idea how many masters he/she is serving.
I guess next we can look forward to pics babies being bayonetted by evil jews/ Maybe mushroom clouds over hospitals? Maybe an evil jew chewing on a babies detached arm? Reuters, you can do so much better! How bout a pic of Isreal soldiers gang raping a 12 your old girl?
A lousy fake at that.
Common sense says the person who doctored the photo was trying to make a political statement through selective amplification.
Thanks. I meant to ask for more info on that before I clicked "post," but forgot.
I would certainly hope that if the IP wasn't spoofed, if the message did in fact come from inside Reuters, the party responsible was canned with extreme prejudice. I've known of people fired for far less.
The Reuters IP address that LGF tracked was probably a Reuters firewall. But armed with that address, Reuters might be able to track it back to a MAC address. If they did find and fire the sender, I doubt they'd ever publicize it.
It seems to me that the pacifier should be a lot more dirty in the other picture given it's position in this picture. Odd.
That picture is so obviously staged, I would like to see someone Photoshop a movie set slate over it with the caption something like, "Qana Propoganda Photo - Take One."
Makes one wonder how many other Reuters photos have been doctored and never challenged.
Like I mentioned earlier it could have been placed on the child too.
Perhaps it was also done at a Kinko's.
I'm sure they're launching a thorough internal investigation. /s