Reuters admits altering Beirut photo

Y-Net News ^

[MatchGrade]

A Reuters photograph of smoke rising from buildings in Beirut has been withdrawn after coming under attack by American web logs. The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke and damage.

[BenLurkin]

This story was "broken" by FReepers yesterday.

[xcamel]

see: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1678623/posts

[cripplecreek]

The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke and damage.

Accused? It was obvious.

[since 1854]

Actually, it ws broken by Little Green Footballs.

[mware]

Give credit where credit is due. Little Green Footballs broke the story first, although many experts here helped prove the fake.

[Izzy Dunne]

Fake, but accurate:

[Leisler]

War With Pictures. Germany's BildOnline. Article translated with Google here.

The Green Helmet Guy in 1986

The Green Helmet Guy in 2006

[muawiyah]

Ah, yes, a Dan Rather moment.

Sorry I missed that one earlier. Looking at the picture now, though, it seems to me that Beirut is portrayed as being the size of New York City ~

[BenLurkin]

I stand corrected.

[VaRepublican]

The "main stream media" strikes again.I tell my kids to watch the news with a critical eye.By the way the glaciers will begin to melt tomorow.

[BallyBill]

I honestly thought that this was a non story. I saw it late last night when I got home and didn't really check it out, but I see others picked up on it.

Great Work, to all involved in exposing this. The give away was when I spotted Waldo on a rooftop.

[Kieri]

You have to hand it to Reuters' apology:

"In the message, Reuters said that "photo editing software was improperly used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this advisory. We are sorry for any inconvience."

Translation:

"...photo-editing software was improperly used (we should've used the smudge tool, dang it!) on this image. A corrected version (a new photo that we've professionally altered this time) will immediately follow this advisory."

What a bunch of liars and idiots.

[feedback doctor]

The big question is: How many on the liberal blogs (DU, moveon, etc) are complaining about the fact that a doctored photo was put out as fact? I bet none on those blogs have complained at all.

[yankeedame]

The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke and damage.

Accused? It was obvious.

=======

Good call! By saying that Reuters was "accused" of doctoring the photograph gives a vague witch-hunt feel to the charge. The correct word is, of course, "exposed".

[ICE-FLYER]

Reuters admits to altering photo

I expect this so I am not at all impressed that they admited to it.

Hillary admits to over 100 of her lies!

Now THIS would be "shocking" news.

[mewzilla]

How about all the news orgs than ran the pic? Will they also run a correction?

[Tai_Chung]

Here are some questions that need to be put to Reuters.

1. What do they know and when did they know it?
2. What safeguards are in place to prevent the publishing of fraudulent photographs and news stories?
3. Will Israel receive an apology from Reuters?
4. What other photos/stories came from the same source and will they get re-reviewed?
5. After the 911 attacks, Reuters' editors decided to forbid the "terrorist" label on Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, Hamas, or any other terrorist group because you wanted to be viewed as impartial. Do you believe your reporting in Lebanon is considered impartial to Israelis?
6. Is it time to review the "terrorist" label decision?

[alrea]

Reuters said that "photo editing software was improperly used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this advisory. We are sorry for any inconvenience."

It is amazing that news organizations feel the need to alter an image like this. They purely have parallel goals to the murderers attacking Israel. Terrorists need news organizations to be effective.

[Alas Babylon!]

No, the big question is: How many times have they done this and gotten away with it? Can anyone say? Why trust them at all?

They imperil themselves. Their biggest asset is their own credibility. Once they lose that, they're doomed. They should be vigorously apologizing and punishing all involved to save this credibility. Since they are not doing so, and only issue a lukewarm response, it says volumes, no?

Guess Reuters is in too deep. They have chosen a side.

[Phsstpok]

4. What other photos/stories came from the same source and will they get re-reviewed?

The "photographer" is Adnan Hajj, who was also the primary "photo-journalist" for the Qana event (I won't call it a massacre anymore because it is becoming apparent that it was staged).

Here's a blog post (link from LGF where there's a lot more coverage of this story) by Jeff Harrell about Hajj.

[John Jorsett]

The first clue was OJ Simpson's face in the smoke.

[right-wingin_It]

Question...did Adnan Hajj (the photographer of this photo) also photograph Qana??

[right-wingin_It]

Just must have just missed your post..I repeated it in #23

[JCEccles]

The "photographer" is Adnan Hajj, who was also the primary "photo-journalist" for the Qana event

Well, isn't that interesting?

[John Jorsett]

Here's a link to the Little Green Footballs post on this subject.

[VOA]

Reuters admits altering Beirut photo

Talk about irony.
When I go to the leading article of the thread, my security service
(either Symantec or Earthlink) tells me that "This page might be
a scam" after I decline to install Active X used on that page!

Honestly, it's probably all harmless, BUT...
I wonder if some angry Reuters operative installed a malware download
on all stories about their exposed forgery!

[Sender]

The most common abuse of photo editing cannot be seen in the photos. Whenever you see an image of a Palestinian child throwing rocks or a rage-filled funeral, there are dozens of photographers behind the camera, not only shooting the scene but directing it. They probably bring bundles of cheap American flags and BIC lighters. If you look really hard on the web, you will occasionally see an image that shows the truth from behind; these images are never printed.

[VOA]

Thanks for the post.
I've been distracted lately (that work and job annoyance) so I've not
gotten up to speed on "Green Helmet Guy".
I think your side-by-side photo arrangement "equals a thousand words"
or more.

[Phsstpok]

Jawa Report has much more.  There's a thread on it here

More doctored photos from Hajj/Reuters?

[RoadTest]

We no longer suspect that the Dinosaur media are united with the terrorists. We know it.

If President Bush were true to his 9/12 vow he would shut down Reuters, the NYT and any others that aid and abet the enemy. But we live in dainty, pussyfooting times. Well, the enemy isn't dainty and pussyfooting.

[VOA]

bump

[SandRat]

But you know they're howling up a storm at DU that it was aneo-con, ultra right-wing radical evangelical conservative blog that just had to nit-pick at everything.

HEHEHEHEHEHE and someone in the group will utter; "An Obscenity FreeRepublic!" hehehehehehehe

[Personal Responsibility]

The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke and damage.
Accused? It was obvious.

=======

Good call! By saying that Reuters was "accused" of doctoring the photograph gives a vague witch-hunt feel to the charge. The correct word is, of course, "exposed".

---

It is only "exposed" if it benefits the Left. Otherwise, it is treated as the hostile "accused"

[paltz]

Nope. LGF this time. Charles Johnson really busted them.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

If you go to Drudge you can read comments about the issue. There is a link there (top left) to Y-Net news. The dominant liberal line is of the "fake but accurate" variety. Scroll down to the very bottom of the articles for comments, such as this gem (Post #3):

Maybe thats true. However, the savage destruction of the civilian infrastructure throughout Lebanon is REAL as well as the killing of innocent civillians. Wake up and stop decieving yourself and your public.

The spelling errors are his, not mine.

[Personal Responsibility]

I just held my nose and went over to DU. They have nothing anywhere on the site about this story. Surprised?

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

What a marelous story.

Another win for the ever-vigilant blogosphere against an increasingly mendacious mainstream media (M³) intent to push its "fake but accurate" viewpoint on the world.

Next up, p'raps: the stage-y looking photos of White T-Shirt Guy and Green Helmet Guy?

[mikrofon]

"Terror Rooters", that's the name
And away the truth goes down the drain...

[paltz]

amazing...he found the fountain of youth!!1!

[TalBlack]

"A Reuters photograph of smoke rising from buildings in Beirut has been withdrawn after coming under attack by American web logs."'

"Damn those pajama bastards!"

Another nail for the coffin of the MSM.

[SunkenCiv]

the following link is a bit earlier, but both are definitely worth visiting!

Reuters Admits Photo Fakery!
Reuters | 8-6-06 | Reuters
Posted on 08/06/2006 7:35:24 AM EDT by Crazieman
Edited on 08/06/2006 8:09:15 AM EDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1678623/posts

[SunkenCiv]

well put.

[OrioleFan]

Bump for later

[Bringbackthedraft]

Looking at the photos its obvious they were doctored, the rising smoke alone. Whats with the triple puffs? I never saw smoke that had 3 identical channeles in the plumes. This all goes back to don't believe what you hear and only half of what you see.

[Phsstpok]

Michelle Malkin has an extensive post about this

And she has provided this link to the Yahoo Images site with a whole bunch of his photos.  I think this is a challenge for Freepers! 

Where's Buckhead? 

I did a search of Google images and came up with a lot fewer hits than the Yahoo search, and the Google ones are mostly of soccer matches (World Cup?)  Can someone else search other photo archive sources?

I won't participate in the close examination of these photos as I'm basically legally blind, so my evaluations  might be just a bit suspect <g> 

[PA-RIVER]

Reuters seems to be saying, "Yes we doctor our photos, but we promise to do it better going forward so you can't tell".

Who is the president of Reuters? Is he a Muslinazi?
Is Reuters now "Al Jazeera II "?

[SandRat]

No I'm not surprised, but the howls of anguish and blame will come from DU as more comes out that Al-Reuters is faking the news and "the knowledgable on the net" are bringing them down just as they did Mary Mapes and Dan Rather.

[NordP]

Score another one for CSI FR!!!

[NordP]

#7. What is the true ethnic background of the graphic artist behind the picture?