Kerry Photo Altered, Used for Political Attack (FR, Registered Mentioned)

Berkeley Daily Planet ^ | February 17, 2004 | Richard Brenneman

[Timesink]

A UC Berkeley journalism lecturer's 32-year-old photograph of future Democratic U.S. Senator and presidential candidate John Kerry has wound up in a forgery that suckered the New York Times.

Ken Light, head of the photojournalism program at UCB's Graduate School of Journalism, has found himself in the eye of a media and Internet storm after a clever forger inserted an image of Jane Fonda alongside his image of Kerry and posted the composite on the Internet.

[longtermmemmory]

I liked this one

[trustandobey]

Proud to claim Registered as our own!

[js1138]

Even before the Times published the first story citing the photo without qualification, Snopes.com, a website devoted to exposing urban legends, had correctly labeled the creation a forgery, tracking down and posting the original photos used to create the composite.

Even before that, within minutes of the first posting of the photo, it was being questioned on FR. I believe if you look at the original thread you will find a post by me calling attention to the irony of the photographed even being named "Register for Peace". I suppose the NYT reprints news articles from The Onion.

[js1138]

[Ramtek57]

[js1138]

Even before the Times published the first story citing the photo without qualification, Snopes.com, a website devoted to exposing urban legends, had correctly labeled the creation a forgery, tracking down and posting the original photos used to create the composite.

Another clue, also pointed out in the original thread, was that the headlines "bleeding through from the other side of the paper" were upside down.

[Ramtek57]

[Spiff]

"The media is the guardian of the visual image," Light said. "Fortunately, the media have risen to the occasion" and debunked the forgery. "The New York Times reported that the photo was forged and they printed both versions. Links to both original photos have been also posted at the journalism school web site (http://journalism.berkeley.edu), he said.

The first to expose the fake was not anyone in "the media". It was people right here on Free Republic where the image was originally published by Registered.

And Kerry's close association with Jane Fonda is not "fabricated", it is documented. He was the national coordinator of VVAW and Fonda was the honorary national coordinator.

Where is the New York Times story that printed the source photo?

[GreenLanternCorps]

That one's been doctored too. Everyone knows that Tourist Guy was sitting to the right of Uncle Ho that day.

[SAMWolf]

LOL! I think I've seen a Tourist Guy Photo with Kerry somewhere.

[petercooper]

Is this picture a fake? W/ Johnnie Chung

[RandallFlagg]

The first to expose the fake was not anyone in "the media". It was people right here on Free Republic where the image was originally published by Registered.

I knew it was faked when I saw (After closer inspection) what Fonda was wearing and knew that that style of clothing wasn't yet popular.

Sorry, Reg.

[Spiff]

The most illustrious media outlet to be taken in was the New York Times, which cited the image in a Sheryl Gay Stolberg story datelined Feb. 12. The Times acknowledged the image as a forgery on Feb. 14.

Where is the New York Times story from the 14th?

[1Old Pro]

The photo looks real to me. I refuse to believe it was altered :)

[Hon]

All the people who are applauding this hoax are DEAD WRONG.

It did nothing but help the other side. It helped them in several ways.

It gave them something to talk about instead of the real photo of Kerry with Fonda--and the very illuminating story of what they were doing together.

It made that photo itself suspect for the rest of the lazy people in the world.

It helped further discredit this site and the internet in general as a source for any kind of news or original reporting.

I can't help but think it was just a juvenile attempt for Registered to insert himself into something that was catching on. To get himself some press and some business.

It wasn't an innocent mistake. And it screwed things up--big time!

[Spiff]

The Independent reported today on the fake photo.

Highlights:

They have been at work ever since, as was seen this week with the fake snap of John Kerry which caused a stir in the United States. It purported to show him associating in the 1970s with the film star Jane Fonda, who is still widely reviled in the US for her visit to the enemy capital, Hanoi, during the Vietnam war. Many still see it as the act of a traitor.

This was not the kind of publicity the Democrats' leading presidential candidate needed. It was, we now know, doctored. But it fooled many US citizens and some British newspapers.

Notice how they fail to differentiate between the legitimate photo of Fonda with Kerry and the fake created by Registered. It lends uncertainty to the authentic photos.

Which means that Senator Kerry can comfort himself with one thought. The faked photos of him and Ms Fonda show that he must have got the Bush camp really worried.

Notice how they want to pin this on the "Bush camp" and not the act of an lone Internet photoshopper.

[Hon]

Here's the NY Times story and link:

Conservatives Shine Spotlight on Kerry's Antiwar Record
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

Published: February 13, 2004

WASHINGTON, Feb. 12 — Ted Sampley, a retired Green Beret who runs a Web site for veterans devoted to defeating John Kerry, says he spent months looking for a photograph of Mr. Kerry and Jane Fonda, the actress whose antiwar protests still evoke bitter memories. Then, last week, a message from a stranger arrived by e-mail, telling him precisely where he could find one.

For $179, he bought the image and posted it on his site. By Wednesday it was popping up all over the Internet and on television. Mr. Sampley, of Kinston, N.C., says he does not know who tipped him off to the photograph, and he does not care. "I'm going to use it as much as possible," he said.

Advertisement


He is not the only one. With Mr. Bush answering questions about his National Guard service, conservatives are working hard to shine an unflattering spotlight on Mr. Kerry's antiwar activities and his record on military and intelligence matters in the Senate.

Commentators, including Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, have been talking up the Fonda photograph. National Review has a cover article entitled "The Senator's Other War Record." It says Mr. Kerry, who returned from Vietnam a highly decorated veteran and then led protests against the war, "helped to slander a generation of soldiers who had done their duty with honor and restraint." The Weekly Standard is highlighting a 1971 book co-written by Mr. Kerry, "The New Soldier," which commemorated a march on Washington by Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

And on Thursday, a new photograph of the senator and the actress began circulating via e-mail. Unlike the image Mr. Sampley bought, which shows Mr. Kerry seated several rows behind Ms. Fonda, this picture — its origins are unclear — shows them side by side, Ms. Fonda behind a microphone and Mr. Kerry, holding a notebook, to her right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/13/politics/campaign/13VETS.html

[abner]

This was not the kind of publicity the Democrats' leading presidential candidate needed. It was, we now know, doctored. But it fooled many US citizens and some British newspapers

To me, it just proves where there is smoke, there is fire. Also, the media that was so willing to jump on the photo as real are the ones at fault for running with it. But it also says that the media think that John Kerry and Jane Fonda on the same stage in 1970 denouncing our country and our troops wouldn't be unusual or odd.

[Colonel_Flagg]

The fabricated association of Kerry, a genuine war hero

Ahem.

[diotima]

You are exactly right!

The media who selective checks out certain stories, like the Kerry/Polier affair and won't report it because its just INTERNET GOSSIP. Yet they take this picture from FR and don't even check the source (AP WORLDWIDE) and run it? Gimme a break.

This is a clear example of how the media becomes responsible when it suits them.