1 posted on
08/08/2006 8:39:58 AM PDT by
exg
To: exg
There is no graver breach of Reuters standards...What standards?
2 posted on
08/08/2006 8:42:16 AM PDT by
mtbopfuyn
(I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
To: exg
Five? I thought the number had been whittled down to ONE.
3 posted on
08/08/2006 8:43:36 AM PDT by
MizSterious
(Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
To: exg
Essentially, it admitted it unwittingly published propaganda as straight news.Maybe, they could just use italics or bold when this ISN'T the case.
4 posted on
08/08/2006 8:43:45 AM PDT by
Onelifetogive
(* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some Freepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
To: exg
...it admitted it unwittingly published propaganda as straight news. Well, so the story goes. Not a little of the stuff they've published wittingly falls under that category as well. I will say that once caught they didn't attempt to bluster it out as did Dan Rather and CBS news under similar circumstances.
To: All
"There is no graver breach of Reuters standards..." "There is no graver breach of Reuters standards... than to get caught pushing our propoganda!"
8 posted on
08/08/2006 8:47:32 AM PDT by
avacado
To: exg
Reuters latest unbiased photos of Israeli troop movements in Lebanon:
10 posted on
08/08/2006 8:48:22 AM PDT by
FormerACLUmember
(No program, no ideas, no clue: The democrats!)
To: exg
Reuter fauxtog Adnan Haijj is a window licker in a short bus.
11 posted on
08/08/2006 8:48:46 AM PDT by
ArtyFO
(I love to smoke cigars when I adjust artillery fire.)
To: exg
Unwittingly-------Unwittingly ??? I hardly thinks so. They knew what they were doing and they got caught.
Does anyone really believe they admitted this of their own volition, just out of the blue.??
They got caught or they would still be doing it and may stil be doing it anyway.
I think dan rather called it fake but acureat. Reuters doesnt have that excuse , Its just plain fake.
12 posted on
08/08/2006 8:49:09 AM PDT by
sgtbono2002
(The fourth estate is a fifth column.)
To: exg
Reuters has pulled the photos but they continue to influence. There is a CNN news graphic montage they use for the "crisis in the middle east" and for a fleeting moment, one of Hajj's stills is used (the one with the unusually bright fireball).
They can pull the photos and issue apologies, but the damage is already done. Only a matter of time before they surface on Hezbollah recruiting posters.
13 posted on
08/08/2006 8:51:12 AM PDT by
SpaceBar
To: exg
Reuters is entirely innocent of this affair. There is no bias in their reporting..
16 posted on
08/08/2006 8:54:21 AM PDT by
GeorgiaDawg32
(I'm a Patriot Guard Rider..www.patriotguard.org for info)
To: exg
"Essentially, it admitted it unwittingly published propaganda as straight news."No, they just got caught because they're getting too blatant, just like the rest of the mass media.
18 posted on
08/08/2006 8:55:23 AM PDT by
cake_crumb
(One presidential visit to Baghdad is worth 1000 pathetic declarations of defeat from the left)
To: exg
It ain't just pictures thats being used as propaganda
19 posted on
08/08/2006 8:55:45 AM PDT by
GeronL
(http://www.mises.org/story/1975 <--no such thing as a fairtax)
To: exg
respected news agency Reuters (??)
Riiiiiight..
To: exg
Just for the tag line.
Which is trademarked and copyrighted, so don't get any big ideas J
21 posted on
08/08/2006 9:17:59 AM PDT by
upchuck
(Rooooooooters ~ Giving smoke and mirrors a bad name since 1937.)
To: exg
But altering photos wasn't Hajj's only specialty. Considering how badly he did it, I hope he finds another specialty.
23 posted on
08/08/2006 9:25:01 AM PDT by
KarlInOhio
(Loose lips sink ships - and the New York Times really doesn't have a problem with sinking ships.)
To: exg
Yep, we in the pajama media figured out the UN-truths by the MSM long ago and their treasonous activities. Nothing new here.......
24 posted on
08/08/2006 9:26:30 AM PDT by
shield
( A wise man's heart is at his RIGHT hand; but a fool's heart at his LEFT. Ecc 10:2)
To: exg
Are staged pictures the same as rearranged ones.
AP's big time news:
Contractors in Iraq got killed in an ambush, their bodies dragged to a bridge and hung up there.
Picture generated by local freelancer.
NBC's:
Troops enter building in Iraq, see two seemingly lifeless bodies piled on top of each other.
The body on top reacts and moves his hand possibly to detonate munitions.
Troops fire, body collapses.
Freelancer takes pictures out of hidden position with perfect angle.
Think about: One dead body at bottom, one wounded body on top clearly arranged.
Freelancer then insists on media freedom rights.
Staging deadly scenarios... is it equal to fixing up truth afterwards, or more so when using staged dead and live bodies to make headlines of U.S. killer troops.
26 posted on
08/08/2006 9:30:49 AM PDT by
hermgem
(The same)
To: exg
"It's particularly sad that Truth is killed again and again..."
"I am the way, the 'Truth', and the life..." Jesus Christ
Truth is crucified (sacrificed) because the world rejects Jesus Christ
Anti-Christ is Anti-Truth...
Islam is a false religion...
Mohammad is the false Prophet
27 posted on
08/08/2006 9:39:51 AM PDT by
AMHN
(Book Survey: Which is greater "Truth" or "Love"? FReepmail a reply)
To: exg
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson