Slashdot Mirror


Reuters Admits, Pulls Doctored Photos

fragmentate points to a post on PopPhoto which says "Reuters pulled a photograph of burning buildings in Beirut yesterday after a post on the Little Green Footballs blog outed it as digitally manipulated. The photo, filed on Saturday by freelance photographer Adnan Hajj, ran with the caption "Smoke billows from burning buildings destroyed during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs." Fragmentate adds "Another image from the same photographer was found to have been doctored. Whether you're a CNN fan, or a FoxNEWS fan, you have to wonder how much of what we see is fake, or exaggerated."

4 of 593 comments (clear)

  1. Remember December 7th, 1941 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait


    It's like a Jap complaining about the Pacific War. Hey, buddy! if you don't want a war, DON'T START ONE !!

  2. The truth is even more complicated by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Would it surprise you to learn that these doctored photos were placed by someone on the far Right trying to discredit the centrist media? Sort of like the way the fake 60 Minutes article on Bush's little vacation from the Air National Guard was placed by a GOP operative trying to smear CBS and Dan Rather. The goons on the Right in this country are playing a very deep game. Their sophisticated enough to data mine, and they're morally deformed enough to try to smear the patriotism of a triple amputee war hero. It's just fascinating that the paste-eaters at LGF are always the ones who find these doctored photos, but never say a word about the ones on GOP web sites that show too much smoke on the destroyed World Trade Center. With a news media that's run by press agents, and a government run by lobbyists, you should just be prepared to only believe your own experience, and the media that you absolutely trust. Other than that, expect it to be lies. Then, get ready for the struggle to save our freedom that is inevitable.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  3. FOXNEWS == REAL NEWS... ABSOLUTELY THE BEST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    I am proud to say that I watch foxnews religously. And of all the other news outlets out there they all fail to compare to fox. Noone comes close when it comes to late breaking news, accuracy, integrity, truthfulness, and fair and balanced as foxnews is. Hell, if it weren't for fox, I probably wouldn't watch or pay much attention to what is going on in the world. Sure Israel is bombing the shit out of Lebanon. And yeah, Lebaonon is getting the raw end of the deal. And IMHO, this is one example of tyranny by a small minority. The people in Hezbollah need to meet their maker. Cause of Hezbollah a whole country has to suffer the wrath of another country who's aim is to live in peace. Is what Israel doing justifiable? That's a good question.? I think it is the tragedy and reality of terrorism. And such groups such as Hezbollah should be dealt with before things like this happen instead of letting them exist and breed hate. For this is a prime example of what can happen when people have had enough.

  4. Re:Before you start implying that someone is paran by MarkusQ · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I'll assume that you were trying to be sarcastic at several points in your first paragraph, if only because your post makes slightly more sense under that assumption. However, that means that you completely misunderstood my point, so I will spell it out.

    Thirty years ago, the Democrats controlled congress, held the presidency, and (if memory serves) had appointed the majority of sitting federal judges. This was what I referred to as the Republicans "being on the mat".

    Thirty years is three decades.

    Rather than laying down and dying, the Republicans decided to fight back, and today the situation is completely reversed.

    They did not do it by accident, nor by luck. It was intentional, and a great deal of time, money and effort was invested in the process.

    As for your final paragraph, in the first place I'm not sure what bald-faced lies you are referring to, and in the second your conspiracy of divisiveness is easily explained as a natural consequence of the two party system. In such a system, both parties will look for ways to build a coalition of roughly 51% -- the minimum needed to win, yet leave the fewest number of supporters to be rewarded. You can get the same result in a classroom setting by handing out red and blue jackets. For that matter, the math behind it is rough;y the same as that for the evolutionary forces behind the nearly equal split between the sexes.

    --MarkusQ