100%... like Churchill said, a lie gets halfway round the world before truth gets it's pants on
Posted on 01/22/2017 6:37:05 PM PST by photoguy
I have completed exhaustive analysis of the disputed Trump crowd shot and the CNN gigapixel crowd shot. As much as it pains me to say, the two images match quite well and the disputed crowd shot is legitimate and represents the actual crowd size. There was no deception on the part of the media.
I have four decades of experience as an advertising photographer. I am qualified to make this kind of analysis.
As a Trump supporter and voter I think it does us a great disservice to not deal honestly with issues such as these. In this case even the President and his staff have it wrong, and it hurts all of us.
The Marxists BLOODIED people the night before. Of course people were being cautious.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-inauguration-ratings-20170119-story.html
looks like the record (more than Obama) was set by Ronald Reagan.
The 30.1 M number for Trump DOES NOT include PBS broadcast. Nor Online. More people stream today than ever, so in my book, Trump and Obama are neck and neck (not that that matters).
What matters is governance. We should be past the color of a person’s skin being a reason to vote for them.
>>>Casual use of the s-word is vastly more offensive than casual use of the f-word<<<
I disagree. Everyone does the “S” word but only consenting Adults should be doing the “F” word.
Thus the argument “everybody does it” actually justifies using the “S” word.
LOL - Well, at least I’m laughing.
The original digital photos would have EXIF data encoded that would detail date and time, exposure parameters and in some cases the photographer’s name and GPS data.
That pic really managed to capture Hillary’s mood.
So what. And? We don’t care and didn’t bring it up first to begin with.
NYT propagandists do not even care if they are caught lying or posting deceptive “noos” — reason: the rule of first contact, people are prone to believe information that reaches them first and disregard the follow-ups.
A formula that’s been working well to reach the Sheeple. Publish lies, let their minions spread it on Social Media
And these lying scumbags are rabid against Trump’s tweets because those fly right over their heads to the people. How many posts have I read screaming for Trump to Delete Your Account?
Screw them! Payback is coming and soon to the Lying MSM.
Casual use of the s-word is vastly more offensive than casual use of the f-word.
So...instead of the s-word, should we just say Obama?
No, Ms. self-appointed language person. It's called a dais.
100%... like Churchill said, a lie gets halfway round the world before truth gets it's pants on
Thank you.
Why? Because it is visually obvious, by reviewing the Gigapixel photo of the inauguration crowd, that Appelbaum's 2-17 photo was clearly taken at an earlier time than the actual moment of President Trump's inauguration.
So that's my first comment.
Now, my question is: what photos did CNN use in their supposed comparison of crowd sizes? If they were working from the Appelbaum photos I just cited, then they were clearly engaging in "fake news".
If CNN used some other photos, then I'd like to see what they did use.
One thing is certain: the Gigapixel photo clearly shows a larger crowd present on the National mall than is shown in the Appelbaum photo.
Now, "photoguy" was talking about "meta data" saying that the time was 12:01 PM, regarding a certain photo of the national mall. What photo is he referring to?
During the course of several dozen posts on the thread, "photoguy" was asked repeatedly to simply post links the actual photos that he was ostensibly comparing, and I don't recall him even responding to that request, even textually, between the time of his original posting and the time of his zot, which was a substantial period of time.
Was "photoguy" simply too engrossed in other aspects of the ongoing back-and-forth, and he didn't have a chance to present his evidence, or was he being deliberately evasive?
Can anyone definitively state exactly what photos CNN was using for their projections on crowd size?
There are two issues: 1) What was the crowd size in 2017 vs. 2009? and 2) What photo evidence did CNN present in order to frame their reporting regarding the crowd size?
Question #2 is actually much more important than question #1, because if CNN used the Appelbaum photos or anything of that ilk as "evidence", then they were clearly engaging in abject propaganda, and they would deserve to be excoriated for doing so, regardless of whether President Trump's crowd was actually bigger or not...
Welcome!
There is no way the “empty” photo is the crowd at it’s biggest size. They showed that long shot periodically on TV and I remember watching the spaces fill up during the morning.
LOL
What’s the story behind the empty bleachers along the parade route, most notably by the reviewing stand? That seemed odd. Those would be the best seats in the house!
Wait. What S-word? Shiite?
Are you sure it isn’t a rostrum, podium-boy?
You can keep obsessing over Latin. Its clear that for some strange reason you can’t help yourself. I’ll just call it what it is, a dais.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.