New York Times joins Reuters with fraudulent photos of it's own

Monday morning we all learned of the shake-up at Reuters when they were caught publishing photos a photographer had edited to make the image more dramatic. This morning we wake up to the news that the New York Times has a photo scam of it's own. The New York Times published a photo essay by Tyler Hicks on July 27, 2006 called "Turmoil in the Mideast." In these photos we see a rescue worker switch roles and play dead while what appears to be staged fires burn in the background.



Look at the details of these photos closely. You'll notice that the "dead" guy only has dust on his hands and his hat is tucked carefully at his side. Dying is hard work so note that he's very sweaty. Dead people don't sweat much so use your discretion when believing this photo.

Look at the muscles in his leg. He's obviously flexing them to keep his back from being scraped by the rubble. More damming evidence is in the fact that there are no fires in the first few images, and later we see fires blazing nearby. Not so close that they would burn the dead man, but close enough for dramatic effect.

This photo essay is from the respected Tyler Hicks of the New York Times. He's a staff photographer and not just a free-lance journalist. Did the editors review these photos before publishing them? If so the implications are scary. Corruption and scandal will slay yet another major news organization this week, when word of this reaches the major networks.

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 9/8/2006 by Mirthful Me]

I just clicked on the NY Times link (for some reason the other link you posted wasn't showing up right for me).

It's absolutely remarkable. Photo 4 of the slideshow has the same guy quite alive and quite active. Same shorts, same hat, same build, everything. Photo six has him lying "dead".

Hezbollywood? At least clue in the photographers first so they don't print the same guy alive and dead.

Amazing!

Just when I thought the NYT had lost all the credibiliity it possibly could, this happens! It's a shame, the NYT is now a joke, it used to be a great paper.

Y'all are jumping to conclusions.

Nowhere that I see does it describe him as a dead man.

He could be faking it, yes, for PR value. Or, he could have collapsed from heat exhaustion while participating in the rescue, which would explain his friend checking his pulse.

I think my explanation is more likely, but whatever floats your boat. It would be nice if we could learn a little more about this situation before passing judgement on the man in the photo, the photographer, and the NYT.

So most, if not all of the mainstream media have been lying to us for years. Is that news?? IMO It's not only the NYT or Reuters...

What is shown now is a correction.

You can see what NYT as to say about it here.

Nowhere that I see does it describe him as a dead man.

NYT changed the caption for picture 6 within the last hour. Up until an hour ago the caption for this photo was

"The mayor of Tyre said that in the worst hit areas, bodies were still buried under the rubble"

The picture shows someone being pulled from the rubble and the caption says bodies were being pulled from the rubble. They were implying that he was dead. Now the picture has a disclaimer but only after everyone came down on them for this obvious propaganda. Aside from this corpse/injured worker bit, the fires in the photos look staged. We don't see them in the first few images. I suspect they were set to make the photos more dramatic.

So most, if not all of the mainstream media have been lying to us for years. Is that news?? IMO It's not only the NYT or Reuters...

I think that's what we need to take away from this story. It's really difficult to trust most of the established media. I suspect most of them have some sort of underlying agenda at work. Take caution when you read their stories about what's happening in the world.

[edit on 9-8-2006 by dbates]

Nice find dbates. Further proof that you can't trust anything anymore. While other news sources (Liberal or Conservative) may not have been implemented in staged scenes and photographs *YET*, doesn't mean they don't do it. Maybe some are more careful than others. Lies, lies, and more lies. Hey,..... maybe there IS no war! Or maybe this blog is trying to frame the NYT!! On a serious note,..... this is very sad on many levels.

Dbates, have you ever stood on the ground where a building has just been leveled by air launched explosives? I doubt you were in Manhattan during 9/11. All kinds of combustable materials from the contents of the buildings are being ignited due to extreme heat and air pockets. Once those fires ignite the area immidieatly becomes hotter. Someone who may have been helping may not have been able to tolerate such heat, and suffered a heat stroke because of it.

Also, sweat does not evaporate for at least 5 minutes if not more after death. So yes a deceased person can still have sweat on his body.

As far as can be seen, someone attempted to discredit the enitre NYT publishing firm because of a single line erroor that may or could have been hacked?

What is the big deal? the media use deception and so our own government this on isolated to media only you know.

Is about time that people in this country see for themselves the manipulation and dirty propaganda that the media and our own government has done for years.

I imagine that the best teachers of this kind of deceptions has been the government itself.

I knew that. . . many knew that we all knew that.

If they can be so deceiving with pictures can you imagine the amount of lies when it comes to government documents enhance for desirable reactions from the Public.

Just think about it.

It doesn't stop with the media and pictures. . .

Originally posted by DYepes
Dbates, have you ever stood on the ground where a building has just been leveled by air launched explosives? I doubt you were in Manhattan during 9/11. All kinds of combustable materials from the contents of the buildings are being ignited due to extreme heat and air pockets. Once those fires ignite the area immidieatly becomes hotter. Someone who may have been helping may not have been able to tolerate such heat, and suffered a heat stroke because of it.

Also, sweat does not evaporate for at least 5 minutes if not more after death. So yes a deceased person can still have sweat on his body.

As far as can be seen, someone attempted to discredit the enitre NYT publishing firm because of a single line erroor that may or could have been hacked?

Suggestion: Read the entire article and look into the situation before getting on that soap box you drag around with you every where you go. Everything in your post is unconnected to what the article is addressing, what NYT has admitted it mis-stated, and what dbates was trying to point out.

"I doubt you were in Manhattan on 9/11"??? WTF, are you serious? So every one who wasn't has no right to point out the errancy of the media? That's ridiculous.

A picture caption with an audio slide show on July 27 about an Israeli attack on a building in Tyre, Lebanon, imprecisely described the situation in the picture. The man pictured, who had been seen in previous images appearing to assist with the rescue effort, was injured during that rescue effort, not during the initial attack, and was not killed.

The correct description was this one, which appeared with that picture in the printed edition of The Times: After an Israeli airstrike destroyed a building in Tyre, Lebanon, yesterday, one man helped another who had fallen and was hurt.

www.nytimes.com...

There must be an epidemic going on Wired News also pulled all its freelance reporters stories. News Yahoo.com

Me thinks I just felt a quake registering 9.5 from the media centers



[edit on 8/9/2006 by shots]

Ain't the Internet/www wonderful! We actually get to catch the snake oil salesmen before they can run out of town.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Y'all are jumping to conclusions.

Nowhere that I see does it describe him as a dead man.

He could be faking it, yes, for PR value. Or, he could have collapsed from heat exhaustion while participating in the rescue, which would explain his friend checking his pulse.

I think my explanation is more likely, but whatever floats your boat. It would be nice if we could learn a little more about this situation before passing judgement on the man in the photo, the photographer, and the NYT.

Checking his pulse??? Exactly what time were you born today? The guy standing is holding the fake deads guys wrist with the palm of his hand. Since when do you check someones pulse with the palm of your hand? I think your explanation is blatant ignorant!

Valhall, some people here are attempting to claim that this whole thing was setup by the New York times for whatever agenda they may have. When the real issue was a simple editorial error on a single statement of text. Hey I do not claim they did not make such a simple editorial error. But to allege the whole scenario was a complete setup without even understanding or having experienced a situation even remotely related to the one illustrated in these photos.

These are photos from a warzone where people are suffering, and dbates wants the readers to believe that this whole scenario has been falsified for a personal agenda citing his examples of why the area "looks" staged or how the man appears to be faking it.

I have seen people been rendered unconcious trying to rescue people from a trailer fire. Obviously a collapsed building that was destroyed by aerial-launched explosives is going to be quite a worse area. Fires are much smaller due to the lower amount of combustible construction material. There are however many chemical compounds and insullation materials that when burned emit hazardous fumes through the building. That can render people unconcious. You can ask the NYPD or FDNY, they will tell you the same, they experienced it on an even larger scale.

Forgive me if the very mention of 9/11 infuriates you Valhall, and forgive me if I give you the appearance of standing on a soapbox. I only wanted to point out the ridiculousness and lack of insight of dbates to allege this photo illustration was a complete setup as the result of a mere grammar and editorial.

Thank you for allowing me the right to express my opinion.

whatever...

Journalistic integrity, editorial due diligence, and endeavours in the pursuit of truth and the effort to tell the news, rather than make the news, preclude this error happening.

I find the error unacceptable and I'm glad the backlash made them correct what would otherwise stand as the "news".

Your attempt at causing a distraction from the lack of substance your diatribe held by insinuating referrals to 9/11 "infuriates" me is without substance. And my record here stands as testament to that statement. I don't see you discussing the topics of substance on 9/11. I only see you popping into ATSNN articles trying to denegrate members who submit information they deem of possible importance to their fellow members.

But at least we have some one we can come to as an expert on trailer house fires.

There must be an epidemic going on Wired News also pulled all its freelance reporters stories. News Yahoo.com

Me thinks I just felt a quake registering 9.5 from the media centers

Jiminy crickets. I didn't know about that one. The media centers must be shaking in their boots if their all going back to check facts on old stories. Reutersgate is having a huge impact!

In an explanation e-mailed to Wired News, Chien acknowledged he created the Ted Collins' Hotmail account and used it in an attempt to mislead editors. Chien said Collins died in 1997, but said he liked his quotes so much he wanted to use them posthumously in the past three months.

Well I only wish to bring an outside opinion to those who wish to attack others, whether they be a press entity being blindly accused of misleading propoganda, foreign civilians blindly accused of terrorism, or American troops in the battle across the world. I am entitled to state what I have to say and do not violate the Terms in doing so. If you would like to address me about any personal criticisms or my manners of dialogue, I would prefer it if we could keep this out of the public forums and deal with it in a U2U in an effort to preserve the appearance, which is how I will reply to any further comments you have on my manner of posting.

Thank you again Valhall for your understanding and forgiveness.

As far as the New york Times is concerned, I am glad to see a trivial editorial issue was addressed, and must say I am slightly dissapointed at the accusations the publication would take advantage of such human agony and contrive some mockery for I don't know what reason.

feign feign feign

No, you wish to ridicule those who share information that goes against your "theory", which appears to be that the U.S. government and Israel are behind all that is evil in the world. And you attempted to do it again on this incidence, but it's not working out real well for you.

feign feign feign

whatever whatever whatever

This was yet another instance of the media being caught in passing false information to the public. It's dreadfully unfortunate (and tremendously telling) that that is not important to you simply because the lie they were caught in this time doesn't work for your bias.