Photographer Fired for Altering Picture

AP | 4/02/03

[kattracks]

Photographer Fired for Altering Picture

.c The Associated Press

LOS ANGELES (AP) - The Los Angeles Times said Wednesday it fired a photographer for altering a front page photo of a British soldier and a group of Iraqi civilians.

In an editor's note in Wednesday editions, the Times said photographer Brian Walski acknowledged in a phone call from Iraq that he had used a computer to combine elements of two photos to improve the composition.

Journalism ethics forbid changing the content of news photographs, and it is specifically barred in the newspaper's policy.

The two photos, taken moments apart, showed a British soldier directing Iraqi civilians to protect themselves from possible Iraqi fire on the outskirts of Basra. Only after the altered photo appeared Monday did editors notice that some civilians in the background appeared twice, the Times said.

Messages left early Wednesday for two Times representatives were not immediately returned.

All three photos - the two originals and the altered photo - were published by the Times on Wednesday.

Walski had been with the Times since 1998.

04/02/03 09:59 EST

[Sam Cree]

If the result was factual, you'd think a lesser punishment could have been in order. Otherwise, I think it makes the LA Times look bad.

[freedomlover]

See, See, we've got ethics, See, See ????

[JoeSixPack1]

Oh gee, LA Times does a CYA and we are supposed to be impressed with their honesty? BZZZT--WRONG.

And what stern lecture did they give their reporter? Something like, "Hey, do what you do, but let's not get caught so easily".

[chiller]

Like to hear from someone who saw the LA Times, and if the pictures told/altered a perception. It's unclear to me so far. Love to catch them trying to make forces look bad or worse. Doesn't sound like this did, but we all know the LA Times.

Help from LA please.

[thinktwice]

Interesting!

The LA Times has no problem twisting truth, so it's only natural for a doctored photo to appear on their front page.

My prediction is that liberals will award this photographer a Pulitzer Prize for the doctored photo.

[chiller]

PS, I refuse to patronize their website.

[Fintan]

See, See, we've got ethics, See, See ????
 

Yep. Now let them get back to the really important stuff like trashing Bush, America, and the coalition forces.

[SquirrelKing]

This one appeared on the cover of the NY Times yesterday. Its only caption was that an American soldier was approaching a wounded Iraqi woman. Diogenesis revealed in his post yeaterday that the woman was used as a human shield and that the American was wounded while approaching her.

But nooo, people wouldn't want to know that. [sarcasm off]

[grobdriver]

Its only caption was that an American soldier was approaching a wounded Iraqi woman

Which should have read, "American soldier was rescuing a wounded Iraqi woman".

[PBRSTREETGANG]

The Iraqi army now wants to use the same technique to show twice as many soldiers in their photos.

[freedomlover]

Yep. Now let them get back to the really important stuff like trashing Bush, America, and the coalition forces.

You forgot to include the bashing of Fox News.

This is not my line but I heard someone say that the media majority wants us to fail while Fox News wants us to win and run up the score! LOL

[Sloth]

Real photos:

Composite photo:

[Toidylop]

"The Los Angeles Times said Wednesday it fired a photographer for altering a front page photo..."

No sh*t!!! When are they gonna fire their own editor for making up stories ??? still waiting...

[Wright is right!]

What's weird is that the changes shown in the composite don't really alter the substance of the scene being shown. The soldier's image is a little larger, making it appear that he is either closer to the lens or a larger man. The people in the background on the left side of the first photo were used along with the by-sitters on the right side of the second photo. This eliminates a white-clad figure at the feet of the soldier in the second photo. And the soldier's stance in the composite is from the first photo, whereas in the second, he was looking in a different direction and without the hand gesture.

Perhaps the LATimes objected to the more powerful-looking solider in the composite. But frankly, this is a lot of BS over virtually nothing.

Michael

[Blue Collar Christian]

It looks to me like the reporter got in trouble for making Americans look better. Who's shocked?

[SquirrelKing]

My wife works at a coffeeshop in town that carries the Times. They don't sell many.

[mabelkitty]

Big difference.

Gun lowered when Iraqi approached with a child.

[chiller]

In this case, it looks like too much was made of it, HOWEVER....that ol' slippery slope could get murky.

No one wants falisfying photos to be OK sometimes, and not at others. Where's the line to be drawn?

I think I'll commend them for establishing the principal that doctoring ANY photos is unacceptable.

[Autodidactic]

He should have just posted it to Fark.com......