Master Index of Archived Threads


New lows in news manipulation

Frayed Knot May 10 2011 08:17 AM

The photograph from the situation room during the OBL mission as run by a Hasidic newspaper in Brooklyn followed by the original version as released by the White House. Hillary, plus another woman in the back, have been edited out so as to match the religious paper's desire to not show women in places of power or to not print photos of women at all.

metsguyinmichigan May 10 2011 09:11 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Absolutely unacceptable!

metirish May 10 2011 09:13 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

They do control the media you know.

Vic Sage May 10 2011 09:14 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

religious zealots warping reality to make it consistent with their pre-conceived worldviews? SHOCKED. I'M SHOCKED. WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Nymr83 May 10 2011 08:22 PM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Hillary, plus another woman in the back, have been edited out so as to match the religious paper's desire to not show women in places of power or to not print photos of women at all. If a newspaper, for religious reasons, chooses not to publish photos of women or the prophet mohammed or whatever then i fully respect/support their choice (as long as they arent advocating violence against those that DO publish the things they don't like.) I do not, however, like the idea of a newspaper editting photos to make them more to their liking. Why not just use a stock photo of Obama or something for your story? on edit- Frayed Knot, I went back and realized you didn't cite anyone here, where did you see this story and which paper ran the altered photo?

Gwreck May 10 2011 08:36 PM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Nymr83 wrote: If a newspaper, for religious reasons, chooses not to publish photos of women or the prophet mohammed or whatever then i fully respect/support their choice (as long as they arent advocating violence against those that DO publish the things they don't like.) I do not, however, like the idea of a newspaper editting photos to make them more to their liking. Why not just use a stock photo of Obama or something for your story? on edit- Frayed Knot, I went back and realized you didn't cite anyone here, where did you see this story and which paper ran the altered photo? The paper in question was Der Zeitung (Der Tzitung, alternate spelling) a paper in Brooklyn. The Jewish Week comments, noting that while supposedly holding to their principles, they violated the Jewish legal principle of g'neivat da'at (deceit). My take is that they're a bunch of hypocrites. I respect their decision to not print photographs of women but if that was truly their concern, they didn't have to print the photo at all.

Edgy DC May 10 2011 08:40 PM Re: New lows in news manipulation

I respect their right to the decision. The decision itself? Nah, I can't respect that.

Gwreck May 10 2011 08:41 PM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Hmm. Good point.

Frayed Knot May 10 2011 08:47 PM Re: New lows in news manipulation

If a newspaper, for religious reasons, chooses not to publish photos of women or the prophet mohammed or whatever then i fully respect/support their choice (as long as they arent advocating violence against those that DO publish the things they don't like.) I do not, however, like the idea of a newspaper editting photos to make them more to their liking. Why not just use a stock photo of Obama or something for your story? on edit- Frayed Knot, I went back and realized you didn't cite anyone here, where did you see this story and which paper ran the altered photo? It was some Hasidic-run paper in Brooklyn, I forget the name and I'm sure it's some minimal circulation deal. The story about the altered photo has been run in numerous places. The Post I think had a link to it a day or two ago. oe: cross-posted with above Point is, if the photo offends them for whatever reason they want to give THEN DON'T RUN IT. But the way NOT to handle things is by altering the picture in order to suit their own version of life and then passing off the result as if that was the way the situation room really looked that night. That goes beyond merely sloppy journalism and is well into intentional manipulation of facts territory. And I don't particularly care that this particular photo was an official WH release which apparently comes with specific instructions that it's not to be altered in any way, they shouldn't do that if I gave them a snapshot of my family picnic and they wanted to edit out my sisters.

Nymr83 May 11 2011 04:24 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

My take is that they're a bunch of hypocrites. I respect their decision to not print photographs of women but if that was truly their concern, they didn't have to print the photo at all. agreed. I think found another picture of theirs...

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 11 2011 09:01 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Cropping the photo to focus tightly on Obama and/or particular aides-- with the desired effect achieved, if subtly-- would be journalistically kosher, though, no?

dgwphotography May 11 2011 09:05 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Cropping the photo to focus tightly on Obama and/or particular aides-- with the desired effect achieved, if subtly-- would be journalistically kosher, though, no? Speaking purely photographically, I don't think it would be. When you crop the photo, you are changing the story of the photo.

Centerfield May 11 2011 09:21 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

The real news here is that they let John Lithgow (back row, second to left) sit in on this meeting.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 11 2011 09:23 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Centerfield wrote: The real news here is that they let John Lithgow (back row, second to left) sit in on this meeting. He wanted to be sure there wasn't any dancing.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 11 2011 09:25 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Most press outlets appear to be opting for this photo, rather than the one where Lithgow's making an overwrought, exaggeratedly-silly "Whaaaaaa!" face. (Also, his foot's on fire in a wastebasket.)

HahnSolo May 11 2011 09:43 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Why is O not at the head of the table?

Edgy DC May 11 2011 09:48 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

Well. we certainly don't want it to look overcomposed.

TransMonk May 11 2011 09:50 AM Re: New lows in news manipulation

HahnSolo wrote: Why is O not at the head of the table? He wants to give the impression that he leans a little left of center.