And another photo bites the dust, another retraction from Reuters, in addition, Reuters has now pulled all photos by the photographer Adnan Hajj.
Reuters admits to more image manipulation
News
organization withdraws photograph of Israeli fighter jet, admits image
was doctored, fires photographer. Reuters pledges 'tighter editing
procedure for images of the Middle East conflict'
Yaakov Lappin
Reuters
has withdrawn a second photograph and admitted that the image was
doctored, following the emergence of new suspicions against images
provided by the news organization. On Sunday, Reuters admitted
that one of its photographers, Adnan Hajj, used software to distort an
image of smoke billowing from buildings in Beirut in order to create
the effect of more smoke and damage.
The latest image to face doubts is a photograph of an Israeli F-16
fighter jet over the skies of Lebanon, seen in the image firing off
"missiles during an air strike on Nabatiyeh," according to the image's
accompanying text provided by Reuters.

Reuters has recalled all photos by Adnan Hajj
Rusty Shackleford, owner of the My Pet Jawa web log
, noted that the warplane in the picture is actually firing defensive flares aimed at dealing with anti-aircraft missiles.
And this statement from Reuters sounds slightly more satisfying than the one issued yesterday:
“There is no graver breach of Reuters
standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an
image", Reuters' statement quoted Tom Szlukovenyi, Reuters Global
Picture Editor, as saying.
However, don't we constantly hear from the MSM how mainstream media is superior to bloggers because of their editors. The photographer might have doctored his own photos, but what about the editor who let the doctored photos through? Shouldn't they be disciplined as well. It is their job afterall.
Related:
Original photo debunking story here.
Update: Fox News video of the story is under "Latest News Headlines"
Michelle Malkin: All of Hajj's photos have been pulled by MargaReuterVille.
The Reuters rot goes higher
But Reuters is
not a purely innocent victim of a rogue photographer. Hajj’s handiwork
should have been discovered by any competent photo editor. Consider
this: Power Line has published
examples of two photos sent to the world’s media showing the same
building in Beirut in ruins. One of the photos says it is evidence of
an attack on July 24th, and the other photo says it is evidence of an
Israeli attack on August 5th.
It should have
been easy for any photo editor with two functioning eyeballs to detect
the summer rerun of the photo. A very distinctive building with a
multi-story geometric pattern on its wall stands adjacent to the
wreckage and was clearly visible in both photos. There is no other word
than “negligence” to describe this kind of editing. The only reasonable
alternative is “complicity.”
Since the
alleged indiscriminate and widespread bombing of Beirut is a cardinal
propaganda theme of Hiz b’allah and its allies, repetitive use of the
same photo as evidence of multiple attacks makes Reuters an ally of the
terror group, fighting the information war on its behalf.
Experts in the
field of public relations counsel getting on top of a problem when an
organization is in a damage control situation. Staying ahead of your
critics by quickly investigating and revealing the entire extent of the
problem is the only way to go. Reuters has violated this well-accepted
principle by refusing to admit that it has a serious problem with its
photo editing.
An excellent post at the Democracy Project makes a few very salient points to remember (go read it all):
· What needs to be understood is that these are neither passing errors
but rather part and parcel of Reuters’ longstanding and insistent bias
against Israel.
· What needs to be understood is that this bias is a purposeful part of
Reuters operating procedure and of its commercial strategy.
· What needs to be understood is that U.S. newspapers are a major
source of Reuters’ revenue, and Reuters’ credibility is enhanced by
being carried in U.S. newspapers.
· What needs to be understood, AND ACTED UPON, is that truth will not
pressure Reuters to reform but only the complaints from these prime
customers, the U.S. newspapers that pay for Reuters’ newswire.
And in the same Democracy Project article, he notes:
Roger Simon hits the nail on the head:
… it is worth noting that in order to justify this kind
of behavior... hiring the heavily biased... to yourself, you have to
pretend you are doing it for a "greater good." In this case that would
not seem to be easy since Hezbollah is well known to be a religious
fascist organization with sub-Medieval values rooted in misogyny,
homophobia and the utter defeat of the Enlightenment. So how then do you find this "greater good" outside the financial viability of your institution? [Emphasis Added]
My question exactly. Why does the media support terrorists and help further terrorist activity? I just don't get it, especially with the American media. How is it that such a healthy segment of our society is so unhappy with their own country, the American way of life and politics, that they are willing to sell out their own country and values to those who would kill them instantly if given the chance? What makes them support a Cindy Sheehan who thinks the Iraqis were far better under Saddam Hussein than they are or will be with a democratic country? What makes them want to cozy up to the likes of Castro, or communits of any stripe? What went wrong in their lives to warp them so?
And I'm not the only one making this point (good post, read it all):
THE NEW YORK TIMES FINDS A NEW HERO: HASSAN NASRALLAH
By Horsefeathers
Totalitarian
killers in pursuit of a murderous utopian agenda can always count on
the New York Times to transform them into noble representatives of the
popular will. Whether Stalin or Hitler, Pol Pot, or Mao, Fidel, Che or
Arafat, the Times will humanize them. The archetype was cuddly Uncle
Joe Stalin as seen through the eyes of Walter Duranty. Count on Duranty's successors to enlighten us about how personable
these tyrants are, how charismatic, good to their pets and beloved by
the people. Mass forced starvation, forced abortion, millions in
gulags, genocide? Not part of "all the news that's fit to print". When
atrocities like China's cultural revolution somehow do make it to the
Times, they're accompanied by a barrage of articles explaining why such
measures are really regrettably necessary. Furthermore, the Times helps
us identify with the human struggles that burden these leaders. We
learn of their personal kindness, their tragic family losses, their
affability, their love of children and pets, but especially of how much
they care for ordinary people, the kind of people the Times itself
believes require help from their betters on its editorial Board.
COMMENTS ENCOURAGED
THE AIM OF EDUCATION IS TO TEACH US HOW TO THINK, NOT WHAT TO THINK.
This site is designed for and best viewed in Firefox with view at 1249x778px
Firefox allows you to resize your font/type size as well as resize the page and/or the resolution for easier reading. This is especially helpful for those still using 800x600 resolution monitor settings.