Lately, there has been a lot of talk in the blogosphere about a Reuters photographer who used Photoshop to double the amount of smoke in a photo of Beirut. The photo was scrutinized by conservative bloggers, starting with Little Green Footballs, and eventually Reuters admitted to the fakery and fired the freelance photographer, Adnan Hajj. The British press has been defending its photos against attack from conservative blog EU Referendum as well. It's very easy for photographers to add Photoshop touches to make a shot more dramatic or to stage photos by asking people to pose in them. However, most media organizations have strict rules against these types of manipulation. As a news watcher and reader, what do you think about the professional photos you have seen from war zones such as Lebanon, Israel and Iraq? Do you trust them or have questions? Do you feel like the photographer has a political bias? Would you rather see photos taken by amateurs at the scene? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and I'll run the best ones in the next Your Take Roundup.
Multimedia
Best of MediaShift
By This Author
-
@FakeAPStylebook Editors Explain Their Overnight Success on Twitter
For anyone who has suffered through reading the entire AP Stylebook for a journalism class, there's a cathartic release when reading the dry wit of the @FakeAPStylebook feed on Twitter. It combines parody of the journalism usage bible with funny repartee and the absurd. That mix has brought amazing success to the people behind the feed: more than 40,000 followers...
-
Harold Evans Sees Bright Future for Print-on-Demand Newspapers
Evans is the editor-at-large for The Week magazine. He has written numerous books, but his most recent is called "My Paper Chase," a fascinating memoir covering his early years as a cub reporter, copy editor and eventually editor and publisher over decades of distinguished work. He connects what happened in those early years to the changes wrought by technology and the Internet, and what he sees as he watches his wife, Tina Brown, co-found and manage The Daily Beast.
-
4 Minute Roundup: Twitter's Real-Time Search Deals; Bloomberg Rising
Here's the latest 4MR audio report from MediaShift. In this week's edition, I look at the deals Microsoft made recently with Twitter and Facebook to incorporate tweets and status updates into its Bing search engine. Google quickly announced a deal with Twitter too, but why should we care? Also, Bloomberg bought out BusinessWeek magazine, but the jewel might well be...
Stay Informed
-
E-mail List 
News Feed »
Follow us on Twitter »
Who We Are
MediaShift tracks how new media -- from weblogs to podcasts to citizen journalism -- are changing society and culture.
Reader Poll
6 comments so far, Add Yours
Geoff Neilson said:
August 10, 2006 6:34 AM
TIME and Newsweek of July 31, 2006 available in South Africa, printed similar photos of a war scene in Beirut--probably taken only seconds or minutes apart-- but with quite different captions. I get the impression that one or both magazines invented their captions. Having worked for almost 2 decades for the largest magazine publishers in the southern hemisphere, I know this is not an isolated case.
Cape Town
Mark Glaser said:
August 10, 2006 1:03 PM
Geoff,
Can you expound on what the photos were and what the captions said -- and why you believe they are false? Also please explain why you don't think this is an isolated case and why there are so many errors in photos in such high-profile magazines.
Mark Eichenlaub said:
August 10, 2006 11:15 PM
I think skepticism is good but the more we know about the backgrounds of journalists the better. The more openness in both government and journalism and transparency in both the more trustworthy they will be viewed as by the public.
Frank Baker said:
August 11, 2006 3:14 AM
Viewing photographs should be no different than how we see other media- we should be using media literacy and critical viewing questions such as: who took the photo and for what purpose and what techniques might be used to make us believe it. As someone one said, one of the casualities of war is the truth.
Ken Leebow said:
August 11, 2006 5:39 AM
Here's an interesting video about photo fraud. Take a few minutes to watch it.
http://www.aish.com/movies/PhotoFraud.asp
Ged Carroll aka renaissance chambara said:
August 15, 2006 1:20 PM
Largely I trust pictures because the economic risk to a photographer and the media outlet that he serves outweighs the temptation to up the ante most of the time.
Can anyone put a figure on the goodwill that Reuters has lost due the incident?
There is the larger question of what governments allow an audience to see, a classic example being the road to Basra which got hit by US aircraft during Gulf War 1, yet the media coverage remained remarkably free of charred cadavers.
Subscribe to comments for this entry.