Wow, you need to take a logic course: in what way does the latter contradict the former?
I do not deny that it was Photoshopped. But "Photoshopp" is not synonymous with "forgery." Read the friggin article: the photo was adjusted for exposure. They expressly deny altering the content of the photo. So unless you actually have EVIDENCE that they did just that, you're spouting baseless conspiracy theories.
Reuters claims that they "burned" an OVERexposed image. Dunno if you use Photoshop, but burning is used for underexposed images. The explainations from Reuters are starting to sound like a 9 year old.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1485316/posts?q=1&&page=104