Reuters admits photo manipulated.

Originally posted by marg6043
The issue of propaganda is no new, over and over here in ATS we have been warning and talking about the same issue not only coming from Lebanon or Israel but also from our own government.


In a world in which public opinion is as valuable as gold, when it can make or brake careers or nations, it is becoming a very powerful tool for unscrupulous groups.

Hello Marg

Well it seems you where correct. We may infact share beliefs outside of the "Other Topic".

And I do Agree.

What I find distrubing, is there are so many here making excuses for Reuters.

HEY, WAKE UP!


The Criminal Liberal Press has SPUN the news for over the last 60 odd years, if not longer. If this is a surprise to anyone, you have lived a sheltered life.

The Case here, revolves around following instructions. Reuters had a story, and needed photos of Beruit Burning. Since this was not a factual account, there of course would no photo's to support the Storyline Premise. Since there was no event, as depicted in the Photo, it was created.

It's nothing new.

I had a C Band Satellite many years ago, and the networks had WILD FEEDS coming from events over the Globe. Hours of Footage would be uplinked to the Affiliates Headquarters for the Evening News. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN all had these.

You could watch and see what was going on.

When the evening News came on, you'd be scratching your head wondering if you just watched the same video, that they just reported on.

I watched most of the Gulf War with George Sr and the Bombing of Bagdad. You could see hour's of footage from the "Other Bastion of Media Integrity", Peter "I'm cowering under the Bed" Arnott, and you could see the Rounds being shot at the Cruise Missles coming in. You could see them get hit, and change course and crash into (UNFORTUNATELY) a School, or Hospital, or Housing, which ends up killing Civilians.

The Storyline is George Sr. is killing civilians, rather than reporting the fact that Defensive fire from positions hit and diverted a Cruise Missle which unfortunately hit a School packed with Civilians.

Waco and Ruby Ridge, also where EYE openers for this. Your saw the ATF Agent shooting and killing his three collegues, that just entered Mt Carmel. The Edited Footage dismisses the Fact, and is produced to "Suggest" Koresh and his supporters had Full Auto Firearms, and they killed the agents.

It's all spun, and it's all to set the stage.

The question should be, WHAT STAGE IS BEING SET?

Ciao

Shane

P.S. Hey Pieman

How are your Family doing? Are they Safe? I trust they are, or even better, they got out. Let me know my friend.

Anderson Cooper of CNN has a diary post in his blog that describes the apparent Hezbollah staging they witnessed while visiting Lebanon.

It seems to tie right in with the staging and manipulation of photos and information given to the media.

Sunday, July 23, 2006 Our very strange day with Hezbollah

Originally posted by Shane

I had a C Band Satellite many years ago, and the networks had WILD FEEDS coming from events over the Globe. Hours of Footage would be uplinked to the Affiliates Headquarters for the Evening News. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN all had these.

You could watch and see what was going on.

Is no doubt that our media outlets are filtered and control to only bring what is desirable for public opinion.

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
I did see the Qana pictures and I did see the ones with the same rescue guy, which means nothing since there are only a handful of rescue people and we are not talking about huge distances between targets, this guy was probably present at quite a few disaster areas that were only a few Km apart or maybe even blocks apart, so that line of thinking is foolish. Only a handful of rescue workers even stuck around, the rest fled and didnt go to work.

The point here is that the guy may have carried around the same "dead" child for a couple of hours, while photographers took pictures. The point of photojournalists (in my opinion) is that they take photos of true events as they are happening, not staged events. They are supposed to report the truth, not bend the truth. If you're O.K with bending the truth in one way, what's stopping you from bending it in more ways than one? How will the public know how far you went in bending the truth? How can we trust that the child was even dead, and not posed to look that way?

We know that a conflict is going on between Israel and Hezbollah. What we don't know are the facts and figures. If Hezbollah claims that the Israeli attack killed 50 innocent men, women and children, and they stage a photograph of 20 live bodies lying in the street with the five real dead bodies in order to make it more dramatic,.... isn't that wrong? They would intentionally inflate the number of dead in order to make Israel look even worse in the eyes of the public. "You see? We kill 10 of their people, and they kill 50! These photos proove it! Disproportionate retaliation!" If someone doesn't see anything wrong with that, I don't know what to tell them.

If the guy was taking a gun and shooting people in the head just to take a picture I could understand, however he didn't. They were actual dead people that Israelis killed, actual buildings that were in the background and actual ambulances that were targetted with Missiles. He could have used 10 bodies 2x and it still doesn't take away from the fact in black and white and in reality, those children died, those buildings were bombed to hell and the ambulance was blown to smithereens...without having to see pictures of it.

Inflating/falsifying figures of people killed is wrong. It doesn't mean that Israeli attacks haven't killed innocent people,..... but it does change the fact that they haven't killed as many as is being reported, maybe not half as many.... therefore their attacks are not as disproportionate as Hezbollah would like to claim. Both sides are wrong about killing innocent people, but it is wrong to lie about the facts in order to win sympathy.

I guess in Vietnam one of the most famous pictures was of that naked Vietnamese girl running down the street in terror and yet instead of taking the picture he could have went to her and threw a blanket around her instead of getting the shot. That picture was a Time magazine cover shot and is still to this day a shocking photo of war.

Yes, the reporter could have helped the child, but his JOB was to report what was happening around him. We don't know whether after having taken the photo, he didn't run out to help the child. The point is to present the public who can't be there to see these things with record through photographs and film.

What about the WWII prisoners that were rescued from the Death Camps? They just all got together for a shot by themselves or were they hand picked and put together for a shot? Maybe they chose the most decimated looking people for the shots?

It is very possible that they were hand-picked, but that doesn't justify every doctored photo in the world. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. The only time a staged photo such as some of the WW II. photos is appropriate only if a proper and truthful caption is given..... such as "Here you see a group of some of the most decimated Nazi prisoners inside the camp."

Some people think that this excuses them from what they have done. A photographer touching up his photos does not take away from the fact that almost a 1000 people are dead.

No, it doesn't take away from the fact that thousands (or rather millions) of people died, but it presents the viewer with the wrong impression that every single person in Nazi camps was decimated.

I don't see where a government cover-up would be the same as a photographer touching up his pictures would be. One is paid to take photos that will get peoples attention and the other is a paid civil worker that is supposed to work for and represent the public and not hide facts from the people they are supposed to serve.

You may not be one of them, but most people are moved more by photographs than the articles themselves. It is a visual shock that remains embedded in a person's psyche. Ever heard of the saying that a picture is worth a thousand words? These photographers may not always be thinking about the money behind a picture, they may be trying to push a Political agenda (kind of like what this Adnan Hajj may be doing). Some are paid by different Political parties in order to influence you to think one way or the other.

I was watching CNN's Anderson Cooper a couple of weeks ago, and he was invited by Hezbollah to film and interview some Hezbollah ambulance drivers. This ambulance was there solely to perform for the cameras. They turned on their sirens, and drove off to an imaginary air strike in order to provide the photojournalists with a staged photograph or two. Are there Hezbollah ambulances responding to real air strikes? Probably. Did this ambulance respond to any such action? No. Was it a real emergency event? No. Was it the truth? No. Was it intended to fool the public into believing that Hezbollah cares about it's citizens? Yes. Do they really care about their citizens? Maybe. Who knows what is anyone's real agenda? None of us can be absolutely sure. Thanks to photographers such as Adnan Hajj, we may never know the truth.

EDIT: I just wanted to add that I'm not saying I absolutely trust that CNN/Anderson Cooper told us the entire truth (though I did see plenty of photographers/journalists at this photoshoot, all focusing on this one ambulance, with the drivers shown smiling during the interview). It was an example.






[edit on 8-8-2006 by 2manyquestions]

Originally posted by makeitso

Anderson Cooper of CNN has a diary post in his blog that describes the apparent Hezbollah staging they witnessed while visiting Lebanon.

It seems to tie right in with the staging and manipulation of photos and information given to the media.

Sunday, July 23, 2006 Our very strange day with Hezbollah

Thanks for that link makeitso. That's the program I was describing in my post below yours.

Was it wrong? Sure. Is this the first time this has ever been an issue? Hell no.

Images are doctored ALL THE TIME. I know this for a fact ... I do web design and I have some friends that do some of the major websites (and yes, one does a major news site).

This is no different than what we've seen in newspapers and magazines for years. You think Angelina Jolie really has asbsolutely no small marks on her face of any kind?

The problem is when this turns into changing the public's perception of the picture. Regardless of the political motives, this drastic of a change is very ill-concieved. Put it this way ... if you worked in the guitar business and sold someone a Fender strat with a Gibson name on it, you'd be fined/arrested for selling illegal merchandise (even if it's blatantly obvious it's not a Gibson). I see no difference here.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
They would intentionally inflate the number of dead in order to make Israel look even worse in the eyes of the public. "You see? We kill 10 of their people, and they kill 50! These photos proove it! Disproportionate retaliation!" If someone doesn't see anything wrong with that, I don't know what to tell them.

2many
These pictures are not needed to know how Israel metes out justice. They have been doing it for a long time. The last time they "defended" themselves in Lebanon they killed over 17,000 people. Israel should look bad and its high time that she did. If after all this killing and people still believe that this is an innocent state then there is something obviously wrong somewhere.


If the concern is only to worry about how bad Israel looks to the public then we have really sunk to new lows in society.

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
2many
These pictures are not needed to know how Israel metes out justice. They have been doing it for a long time. The last time they "defended" themselves in Lebanon they killed over 17,000 people. Israel should look bad and its high time that she did. If after all this killing and people still believe that this is an innocent state then there is something obviously wrong somewhere.

If the concern is only to worry about how bad Israel looks to the public then we have really sunk to new lows in society.

ThePieMan,.... I understand what you're saying, but I don't get the sense that you understand what I'm saying. Inflating the truth to prove your point is wrong.

If you have a serial killer on your hands who has killed four victims,......(which is bad in itself), but you tell the media that he is responsible for killing 8 people, you are clearly lying. If you stage photos of dead people which died of other causes, and not at the hands of this serial killer, you're lying. The serial killer should be judged for the four victims he/she is responsible for,... and not the additional four that you made up in order to 'make people see that this is a bad guy'. Let his own actions speak to us. We need the truth to make up our minds, not lies. Lies only weaken your position, and people lose their respect for you.

In addition, Israel is not the only instigator here. Hezbollah (as well as other 'terrorist' organizations who support suicide bombers to go into Israel and blow up innocent civilians) is also responsible for the deaths of many innocents. Do you believe that if suicide and terror bombings stopped in Israel completely, that the Jews would continue to go into Palestinian neighborhoods and kill Palestinian civilians? My guess is that if BOTH parties seized hating each other because of their respective religions/histories, much of the violence would go away. If BOTH of them learned to coexist and respect each other, much of the violence would go away. This is not one-sided by ANY means. Israel is no better or worse than Hezbollah, and the Lebanese civilians who 'supposedly' support Hezbollah's actions. If you go blow yourself up in an Israeli marketplace, kill 10 people, and Israel retaliates by knocking down an entire Palestinian block,...... why would anyone continue to send in more suicide bombers?!?! Ever thought that maybe you'll save hundreds of Palestinian lives just by NOT blowing yourself up?

Like I stated in a couple of my posts here on ATS, it is possible to coexist with an enemy peacefully. My home country is an example of that. We are surrounded by enemies (yes, they tried to kill us off, or simply wipe our culture from the face of the earth), and live peacefully next to them. Many live inside our country. We did not achieve this peace by suicide-bombing the heck out of their civilians. We did it through negotiations.

Then you have the African Americans who achieved equality through peaceful protests. The Civil Rights movement, not suicide bombs, won them equality. Had they started blowing up buildings and white Americans,.... you bet that white Americans would have continued to be racist against them, even try to kill them off one by one. Racism in America may not be completely wiped out, and many racist people resisted integration for as long as they could,...but today a very large majority of Americans is appalled when it comes to racialy-motivated hate crimes. We have established laws that punish such crime, and many people respect those laws in order to coexist peacefully.
To gain respect, you must demonstrate respect.
I wish other nations could learn from these examples.
(I'm Sorry for going on a rant here. )

i agree.

in a nutshell, all the fighting is wrong to begin with. artificially inducing more (or trying) is terrorism by definition

Originally posted by jprophet420
i agree.

in a nutshell, all the fighting is wrong to begin with. artificially inducing more (or trying) is terrorism by definition

Precisely!