Reuters Admits Photo Fakery!

Reuters ^ | 8-6-06 | Reuters

[Crazieman]

PICTURE KILL FOR LBN20 TRANSMITTED AT APPROXIMATELY 1408GMT ON AUGUST 5, 2006. PHOTO EDITING SOFTWARE WAS IMPROPERLY USED ON THIS IMAGE. A CORRECTED VERSION WILL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW THIS ADVISORY. PLEASE REMOVE THE IMAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEMS. WE ARE SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE. REUTERS LBN20 Smoke billows from burning buildings destroyed during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs August 5, 2006. Many buildings were flattened during the attack. REUTERS/Adnan Hajj (LEBANON) REUTERS NEWS PICTURES

See Also

Reuters employee issues 'Zionist pig' death threat (to Little Green Footballs)

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

I wasn't so sure they were actually fakes at first, but http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1678623/replies?c=6
makes a very compelling case.

My point is, that these crude fakes could/should have been detected mathematically, by simple tests of internal validity, without recourse to external tests or human intervention. There is no substitute for a "human in the loop", but a cheap, simple statistical test would have been a bell ringer, alerting editors to the possibility of fakery.

[PA-RIVER]

Today is August 6, Hiroshima Anniversary.
In honor of Reuters outing,
Can someone display Hirohima PICs, with Lebabnon titles?

[Malsua]

[ReignOfError]

But the doctored photo doesn't make Beirut look any more wasted than the original.

FWIW, I thought it did. And I'm sure they thought that technique a lot safer than photoshopping a building that would turn out not to have been hit. It's all about nuance. And fortunately, they didn't get it right.

I doubt that whoever did that Photoshop job could spell or pronounce nuance. It was a subtle as a haircut with a hedge clipper.

I'm sorry, but I don't think you can accuse someone of ham-fisted propaganda and razor-sharp nuance using the same photo as evidence of both.

[do the dhue]

[Suzy Quzy]

Adnan Hajj, the photographer is a liar....Why am i NOT surprised??? It's what Muslims do...they LIE.

[rlmorel]

Or..is he half man-bear and half pig...or half man and half bear-pig...?

I just saw a portion of that episode recently, and thought it was one of the funniest things I had seen in a while!

I must be the only person who has never watched an episode of South Park (I very rarely watch television...) but I had seen too many references to this episode to remain in the dark!

[Chode]

this one needs to be in there somewhere...

LOOK... it's TouristSenator!!!
It shows up in more places than TouristGuy did only with less style and substance...
she's Vaporware, just an empty crusty.
(Please spread me around like the parasite that i am...)

[Timeout]

Please add me to that "Dinosaur media" watch list!

[do the dhue]

I think Security needs to check her back pack. You know the Muslims are offering a lot of virgins if one blows them self up.

[be4everfree]

Just a thought here.

Because the photoshop job was so bad, maybe it's bad on purpose, done by someone that wants to send a message that we need to look at other photos.

I'm only saying this because that is exactly what is happening.

[do the dhue]

please add me too.

Thanks

[ReignOfError]

FWIW, I think I just figured out what Rooters was up to. In the undoctored pic, the source of the smoke is clearly coming from one one place/building. In the doctored version that's not as easily to see, especially if you're not examining the pic closely. A cursory glance might make you think that the IDF blew up an entire area of the city. Which was undountedly the intention.

This illustrates my point. "Undoubtedly the intention?" Undoubtedly?

If you're looking for evidence of media ineptitude, you don't have to dig at all. There are plenty of examples of bias. But media bias is like anything else -- if you look hard enough, you'll find it. Whether it's a vision of the Virgin Mary in a water stain on an underpass or a hidden Reuters agenda, if you stare long enough, it will appear.

As I replied to another poster, you can't use the same image to illustrated ham-handed propaganda and subtle manipulation. No one sophisticated enough to tweak the smoke cloud to make the destruction look ten percent larger would let that clumsy photoshop job slip by. Again, I might be a minority of one on this, but I think there's an eagerness to attribute to malice something far more easily explained by incompetence.

[pissant]

Exactly.

[BlueSky194]

As Bob Seger would say.

Shakedown, breakdown, takedown
Everybody wants into the crowded light
Breakdown, takedown, Your Busted!

[rlmorel]

FROM REUTERS (DATELINE: 8/6/1945): "American crewmembers pose before their mission which killed tens of thousands of innocent Japanese whose country is engaged the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere project, which has the goal of freeing their fellow Asians from the clutches of European and American colonialism."

[tsmith130]

Again, I might be a minority of one on this, but I think there's an eagerness to attribute to malice something far more easily explained by incompetence.

I understand what you are saying, Reign. But you explain it away by stating that "it's incompetence" at doctoring a photo. It's not the incompetence that's at issue, it's that he did it at all (and that the editors didn't stop an obvious doctoring)...even for a 10% increase in the appearance of destruction.

[pissant]

Despite being busted time and again, Al-Reuters will never leave the side of the enemy and embrace objectivity. They are a narcissistic cancer, that fortunately is being rejected as news by more and more people.

[gopheraj]

Is this the photo? Did a search on Nasser/Nasser and found this for 7/30. Not sure how to do html stuff.

http://news.yahoo.com/photo/060730/481/ecb32f9e74c041fa9a982e358b51d8ff

[TET1968]

Looks like they even suggested a mustache.
Lot's of high fives going on in the msm.