Try that again... Now, if we're going to push the journalists are idiots because they publishe some unsourced rumors without checking them out story, shouldn't we also be making a great deal of noise about just which unsourced rumors they will publishe (the unsourced, fake Kerry photo obtained from the Internet and/or email) but not other unsourced rumors (Kerry boinked his intern)?
Sheesh! Again...do I need new glasses!?
Try that again... Now, if we're going to push the journalists are idiots because they publish some unsourced rumors without checking them out story, shouldn't we also be making a great deal of noise about just which unsourced rumors they will publish (the unsourced, fake Kerry photo obtained from the Internet and/or email) but not other unsourced rumors (Kerry boinked his intern)?
I am one who thought it was a mistake for conservatives to associate themselves with the Kerry intern "story" before the rumor's critical foundation (support of the "story" by the young woman) was in place. That "story" was intended to accurately depict reality and would have no aesthetic value if it was not true.
However, I see this photo thing much differently. The photo here is art. It was never intended to accurately depict reality, except in an artistic nonliteral sense. What the world does with the artist's art is not the fault of the artist; in fact, it becomes part of the art itself. ;-)