[dirtboy]

"There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image," Szlukovenyi said in a statement.

But pictures of staged events are still acceptable.

[Allegra]

But pictures of staged events are still acceptable.

Twisting and distorting the facts to the point of fiction and taking people's comments completely out of context to suit their agenda are still OK, too.

[Diamond]

But pictures of staged events are still acceptable.

As in, a staged photograph of a burning Koran by the same photoshopgrapher?

"Well! I guess a foreign Muslim photographer just got lucky again to find the inciting, dramatic picture of a burning Koran after an Israeli air strike, huh? It's the perfect visual metaphor for the Islamist cause -- the Jews destroying the Koran itself -- and I just suppose he happened to luck upon a bomb site where one was conveniently still aflame. I would imagine a book would either stop burning, or be completely burned (and hence not burning) 99% of the time you visited a scene two hours after an attack, but this phographer just got lucky once again, right?

That photographer's name, by the way? Adnan Hajj of Reuters."

Ace of Spades HQ

Cordially,

[MagnoliaB]

"But pictures of staged events are still acceptable."

I was thinking the same thing.

[Clink]

"There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image," Szlukovenyi said in a statement.

Complete statement:

"There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image which is so amateurish that it is spotted by the general public" Szlukovenyi said in a statement.