Richard at EU Referendum has some very apt comments on the Reuters Photoshop Scandal, and the likelihood that photos of the aftermath of the Qana bombing were staged by Hizballah. I’ve tried to bring up this subject in every interview, because I agree with Richard that this practice is much more insidious than clumsy image editing.
If not for the inept Photoshop work of Adnan Hajj, however, the issue of photo staging might never have been raised.
Richmond is asserting that publishing pictures of Hezbolla agents, parading the bodies of dead children in front of complicit photo-journalists for propaganda purposes, is perfectly acceptable as long as the result also matches what his paper wants to convey.
And that is why the crowing of the blogsphere is potentially dangerous. Not for nothing, more than a week after the first doubts about Qana have emerged, is the BBC prepared to entertain the issue. Although it has addressed the Qana issue, it was a brief exposition and the main focus was on “Reutersgate”, which is reflected in the minimal publicity given to the issue in the wider media. If this goes on, then Reuters will become the fall-guy for a problem that, as my colleague rightly points out, is far wider and more serious than doctoring a few photographs.
At the root is that death – or pictures of death - have become a commodity. For Hezbolla, they can be traded for political leverage, for the photo-journalists – those who are not working for Hezbolla – a good “snap” of a dead baby brings the prospect of financial reward, fame and even awards. And, at the top of the heap are the editors and the likes of Shane Richmond, in their air-conditioned offices, thousands of miles away from the action, who see the “pics” merely as illustrations for their productions.
These people have become so degraded, so devoid of humanity and so divorced from civilised mores that pictures of death are assessed on their artistic merit, their emotional power and relevance. Their source and method of procurement are quite irrelevant as long as they are “suitable for purpose”. One can almost imagine a scene where pictures are swapped like cigarette cards of old... “I’ll give you two dead girls for your dead baby, and throw in a dead old man to make up the balance”.
It is that amoral, soulless commercialisation of the images of death that gives Hezbolla its propaganda power. As long as it knows that the Western media is in the market for this commodity, and it suits its own propaganda purposes, it will ensure a continued supply. And that is another reason why Qana is so important. In that benighted Lebanese village, death was a tradable commodity in an obscene marketplace. And the media did not seem to think that there was anything wrong.
The “progressives” at Media Matters are hopping mad that I suggested some of the photographs from the Qana bombing may have been staged: CNN’s Nguyen failed to challenge claims that Qana photos were staged.
Their counter-argument consists of pointing out that the wire services have denied staging any photos. So now Media Matters suddenly takes the media at their word? link: 95 comments
Posts will be a bit slow this morning; I’m about to go to the Fox News studio...
Reuters calls the doctor, take 3
In "Reuters calls the doctor, take 2," we noted that Retuers disseminated two Adnan Hajj photographs showing the same collapsed building that fell as the result of raids dated July 24 and August 5, respectively. In the background of each was a building with a pinwheel painted on it.
Now we learn from reader Leigh Fellner that AFP disseminated two photographs by Ramzi Haidar (here and here) of the same damaged building on July 18. Mr. Fellner has created a composite (below) with all four photographs.
He observes that the building in both AFP photos dated July 18 and the Reuters photos dated July 24 and August 5 is the same building. Among other things, he notes:
*same hole blown in lower right quadrant;
*same damage to building in the foreground;
*same large white sign on that building, hanging at the same askew angle; and
*same erector-set style signpost with two white signs on it at the streetcorner.
As a bonus, Mr. Fellner adds a
possible sighting of Green Helmet Man in Beirut.
Posted by Scott at 05:26 PM |
Permalink comments from LGF: |
link: 112 comments
"fauxtographers..." The Reuters Photo Fraud page...
| #71 |
 |
galloping granny 8/9/2006 07:34PM PDT |
Another video of yours truly, posted at Hot Air, in which CNN’s Anderson Cooper admits that Hizballah is staging photographs from Lebanon: Charles Johnson, Howard Kurtz, Anderson Cooper on Reutersgate. link: 58 comments
Anti-Israeli Cyberterrorist Attacks Planned for Tomorrow
An LGF reader who worked for Associated Press TV News sent me the following article explaining how APTN works, and suggesting a reason why their coverage of the Middle East is so overwhelmingly biased against Israel:
How Much Does It Cost to Buy Global TV News?
The vast majority of the TV news pictures you see are produced by two TV news companies. Presented here is a case for how a large amount of money has been used to inject a clear bias into the heart of the global TV news gathering system. That this happens is not at question, whether it is by accident or design is harder to tell.
You may not realize it, but if you watch any TV news broadcast on any station anywhere in the world, there is a better than even chance you will view pictures from APTN. BBC, Fox, Sky, CNN and every major broadcaster subscribes to and uses APTN pictures. While the method by which they operate is interesting, it is the extra service this US owned and UK based company offers to Arab states that is really interesting.
About the Associated Press
The Associated Press (AP) is a not-for-profit news gathering and dissemination service based in the US.Formed in 1848, the AP grew up from an agreement between the six major New York newspapers of the day. They wanted to defray the large telegraphy costs that they were all independently incurring for sending the same news coast to coast. Despite being highly competitive, they formed the Associated Press as a collection agency and agreed to share the material. Today, that six-newspaper cooperative is an organization serving more than 1,500 newspapers and 5,000 broadcast outlets in the United States. Abroad, AP services are printed and broadcast in 112 countries.
Associated Press Television News
Associated Press Television News (APTN) is a wholly owned subsidiary of AP. It was formally set up as a separate entity in 1994. It is run as a commercial entity and aims to make a profit. Any profit it does make is fed back to AP (which is non-profit making: APTN profits reduce the newsgathering costs incurred by the 1500 US newspapers that collectively own the AP). APTN is the largest television news gathering player (larger than Reuters, it’s only true competitor in this field). While AP is based in the US, APTN operates out of large premises in Camden, London. They have news teams, offices and broadcast facilities in just about every important place in the world.
APTN uses news crews and broadcast facilities all over the world to record video of newsworthy events (in News, Sport and Entertainment). These pictures are either sent unedited or very partially edited back to London. Most news is fed back within hours but they also cover and feed certain events live (news conferences in Iraq, press conferences after a sporting event etc.). Most of these stories are sent in with “natural sound”: there is no journalist providing a voice over, but the choice of what to shoot is in the hands of the local producer and camera crew. Local crews are sometimes employed directly by APTN, or more often “stringers” are hired for a particular event or paid for the footage they have already captured.
Once the stories have been fed back to the UK they are edited. This is a round the clock operation. The goal is to produce a 30 minute news bulletin comprising 6 or 7 stories every few hours. These stories are made by editing down the raw “rushes” that come in from all over the world. This is done by a team of producers who work for the news editor. They don’t supply a voice over but they do edit, discard and sequence pictures dictating the emphasis and direction of the story. They will accompany each story with a written description of each shot and the general reason this was a story. This is repeated for News, Sport & Entertainment with a geographical emphasis that shifts around the world as different markets wake and sleep. The output of this is called the “Global News Wire” (GNW).
The Business of TV News
This is how APTN makes its money: news organizations (mostly TV but not all) subscribe to APTN and pay an annual amount to both watch and then re-use the stories that are fed over the GNW. The stories are supplied with sound, but no journalist to do a voice over. Most commercial news stations (like the BBC, SKY, Fox or CNN) would take this feed, decide which pictures to use then re-edit it and supply an appropriate voice over for the story. The video comes with a written description of the shots and the events that occur in them.
The fee for this feed depends on the size of the receiving organization, their audience size and a negotiation with APTN’s sales force. It is pretty much impossible, however, to operate a TV news organization without taking feeds from either APTN or Reuters or usually both. The agreement with APTN usually allows the receiving news channel unlimited use of the video for two weeks. If they want to re-show those pictures after that they have to separately license the pictures (which can cost anything from $100 to $10,000 per 30 seconds depending on the content).
A Separate Service for Arab States
However, there is another significant part of their business model that affects the rest of the business. While most of the world takes news pictures with minimal interpretation beyond editing, the Arab Gulf States have asked for and receive a different and far more expensive service. These states pay for a complete news report service including full editing and voice overs from known journalists. The news organizations in the Arab countries don’t do anything (beyond verify that they are appropriate for local tastes) before broadcast.
What this means is that while there are around 50 people producing news pictures for the whole world working in Camden at any time, there are a further 50 Arabic speaking staff producing finished stories exclusively for the Arab states of the gulf. This has a tremendous effect on the whole feel of the building as these two teams feed pictures and people back and forth and sit in adjacent work areas. The slant of the stories required by the Gulf States has a definite effect on which footage is used and discarded. This affects both the Gulf newsroom and the main global newsroom.
This full service feed is much more expensive for the customers than the usual service, but it is also much higher margin for APTN. This is partly because there is great commonality in what they can send to most of the Gulf States taking this service: stories are made once and used in a number of countries.
Disproportionately Negative Coverage of Israel
Anything involving Israel is a favorite with Gulf Arab states for showing to their viewers. Could this be the reason why Israel receives such a disproportionate amount of particularly negative coverage especially and increasingly ever since the early 1970’s? HonestReporting is usually unable to decide which is most biased: AP or BBC. As the BBC is often using APTN footage, the difference is minor. A significant twist to what is seen, concerns what is not seen. Footage such as the Palestinian mob joyfully lynching two Israeli reservists in Ramallah in October 2000 is held by APTN’s library: any attempt to license this film for reshow is carefully vetted. Requests for the use of “sensitive clips” are referred directly to the Library director. This is not the case with clips that paint Israel in a bad light. Likewise, the re-showing of Palestinian celebrations on 9/11 is considered “sensitive”.
The way in which raw footage such as APTN’s is compiled into a news report and sent round the world has also been analyzed. The Second Draft gives a comprehensive view of how editing can make all the difference. APTN is the gatekeeper that sits between you and the actual event. You will never see what the editors at APTN see before they compile your evening news. What do you think is cut out?
The Wrap-Up
Was this organization set up with this in-built bias on purpose? Is there some way that the expensive payments made by Gulf state governments form part of a deliberate attempt to skew the media? In “Islam and Dhimmitude” (2002) by Bat Ye’or on p294-296 she recounts how decisions were taken in the wake of the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 to try to put across an anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist message. Successive conferences resolved to contribute vast sums “to universities, centers for Islamic studies, international communications agencies, and private and governmental organizations in order to win over world opinion.” (p296). The messages from these conferences stressed an addition to the more familiar violent jihad: they also emphasized the importance of jihad by the written and spoken word. What we would recognize as classic propaganda. Without question APTN’s interesting business model represents a concrete example of an ongoing financial “contribution” to an important communication agency promoting a pro-Arab bias.
"APTN is an echolocation chamber. Reality-Based™ media at its best...so petro dollars are buying out the free flow of information-and the AP sold out Israel for petro dollars..."
In the FYI, FWIW department, friend Angry continues to be plagued by Attention Whore & Internet Pestilence D-Cubed ( Demented Docktor Deb, AKA D3 ):
http://www.stevejanke.com/archives/190377.php
Do I ban Deb Frisch? I have never banned anyone from Angry in the Great White North...But until this comment by Deb Frisch, I have never had one that was calculatingly deceptive and designed to cause hurt to someone else...So do I ban her IP address? I'm not sure.
Readers of this blog might have noticed what read like a suicide note appearing as a comment to one of my posts. It appeared to be from a member of the US armed forces, a Navy SEAL named Matthew Heidt.
Don't worry. No one is going to get hurt. I've been Frisched.
This morning, I discovered I had been Frisched:
Based on the access logs, she came to my blog via Pajamas Media at 23:02:55. She didn't do much reading -- at 23:03:44 she went to "Monopoly on violence -- again" post and left her creepy suicide note.
Deb Frisch has graced my blog once before, commenting at this post:
Both IP addresses are hers, according to Patterico:
In any case, she's up to her old tricks. Finding conservative bloggers and trying to embarrass and humiliate them.
Update #1: If you are wondering why Matthew Heidt was targetted, know it was not random:
And she is actually in Eugene, Oregon, according to this entry in ORBlogs.
Update #3: Deb Frisch comments on the allegation of being the master of the Matthew Heidt sockpuppet:
Update #4: On my post where I invite readers to voice their opinion on whether Deb Frisch should be banned from commenting on this blog, Deb Frisch adds her own two cents:
Oh no, "teh crayzee" strikes again. Check out this site for more updates:
http://donthiredeb.blogspot.com/
A brief conversation between
A "Word Warrior" (WW) and "Teh Vodka" (TV)
TV: What's all this about froggy?
WW: hombra got na honerz an kneeds 2 di
TV: Wow, ok, what about Jeff?
WW: da 123 gots zero honerz an kneeds to stfu. kapeech
TV: So you have all the honor, I suppose
WW: props from my peeps! olive u
TV: If you have so much honor, why can't you admit a mistake
WW: da pissant gots ta b sut dawn! I don wanna hair bout dat nomo!
TV: Of all the people who drink vodka, I get this...
Update:OK, that sucks... Try
this
del.icio.us: 
In the FYI, FWIW department, friend Angry continues to be plagued by Attention Whore & Internet Pestilence D-Cubed ( Demented Docktor Deb, AKA D3 ):
http://www.stevejanke.com/archives/190377.php
Do I ban Deb Frisch? I have never banned anyone from Angry in the Great White North...But until this comment by Deb Frisch, I have never had one that was calculatingly deceptive and designed to cause hurt to someone else...So do I ban her IP address? I'm not sure.Posted by: backhoe at August 12, 2006 03:13 AM