Under normal human experience, we would all find these photos full of pathos and mourn the loss of the children and the innocence of childhood that war necessarily takes from the young. But with all photos coming from Hizb'Allah bombing sites now in question, instead of seeing pathos we see fakery and wonder why there is no dust, or why the toys look so carefully posed in place. Take a look.
Related:
The blogosphere has been casting around for the right title to give to the whole fake photo scandal, coming up first with Reutergate. But there are already so many "gates," it seems a worn out phrase. Little Green Footballs has come up with a new title that I, for one, think is brilliant ... Fauxtography. And a hat tip to them for the above "Toys" link.
Ace has more:
The Passion Of The Toys, Part II: The Pooh Strikes Back
Clean and pristine toys seem to be littered on the ground at every Israeli airstrike.
Are the Israelis dropping bombs with submuntions consisting of adorable plushies? Cluster-Poohs, maybe?
These photos do not appear to me as dubious as the ones found by Slublog.
Nevertheless, there is a certain rule that seems to be in effect for photographers in Lebanon:
If an Israeli bomb hits and you can't produce a corpse, at least produce a toy.
I know this much, the whole fauxtography thing is starting to piss me off.
Jeff Goldstein sums up in a post he aptly titles The Sandman’s Revenge:
Which is this: war is unhealthy for children and other living things!
—Of course, so are bus bombs and exploding jihadis in seaside pizzerias—but that doesn’t sound quite so fraught when printed on a bumper sticker or worn on a colorful protest pin.
Comments