Reuters (again) - A Doctored Picture Worth a Thousand Useless Words

[Woodmonkey]

Reuters Withdraws All Photos by Lebanese Freelance


LONDON, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Reuters withdrew all 920 photographs by a freelance Lebanese photographer from its database on Monday after an urgent review of his work showed he had altered two images from the conflict between Israel and the armed group Hizbollah.

Global Picture Editor Tom Szlukovenyi called the measure precautionary but said the fact that two of the images by photographer Adnan Hajj had been manipulated undermined trust in his entire body of work.

"There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image," Szlukovenyi said in a statement.

"Reuters has zero tolerance for any doctoring of pictures and constantly reminds its photographers, both staff and freelance, of this strict and unalterable policy."

The news and information agency announced the decision in an advisory note to its photo service subscribers. The note also said Reuters had tightened editing procedures for photographs from the conflict and apologised for the case.

Removing the images from the Reuters database excludes them from future sale.

Reuters ended its relationship with Hajj on Sunday after it found that a photograph he had taken of the aftermath of an Israeli air strike on suburban Beirut had been manipulated using Photoshop software to show more and darker smoke rising from buildings.

An immediate enquiry began into Hajj's other work.

It established on Monday that a photograph of an Israeli F-16 fighter over Nabatiyeh, southern Lebanon and dated Aug 2, had also been doctored to increase the number of flares dropped by the plane from one to three.

Filing drills have been tightened in Lebanon and only senior staff will now edit pictures from the Middle East on the Global Pictures Desk, with the final check undertaken by the Editor-in-Charge, Reuters said.

Hajj worked for Reuters as a non-staff contributing photographer from 1993 until 2003 and again since April 2005. Most of his work was in sports photography, much of it outside Lebanon.

Hajj was not in Beirut on Monday and was not responding to calls. He told Reuters on Sunday that the image of the Israeli air strike on Beirut had dust marks which he had wanted to remove.

Questions about the accuracy of the photograph arose after it appeared on news Web sites on Saturday.

Several blogs, including a number which accuse the media of distorted coverage of the Middle East conflict, said the photograph had been doctored.

The Source




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'

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

The 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.

Caught Red Handed

Reuters admits altering Beirut photo

Reuters withdraws photograph of Beirut after Air Force attack after US blogs, photographers point out 'blatant evidence of manipulation.'

In addition, Shackelford says the flares have been replicated by Reuters, giving the impression that the jet was firing many "missiles," thereby distortion the image.

"The F-16 in the photo is not firing missiles, but is rather dropping chaffe or flares designed to be a decoy for surface to air missiles. However, a close up (of) what Hajj calls "missiles" reveals that only one flare has been dropped. The other two "flares" are simply copies of the original," Shackleford wrote. "But what about the 'bombs' in the photo? Here is a close up of them. Notice anything? That's right. The top and bottom "bomb" are the same."

Another manipuated Reuters image

Following the accusations, Reuters conceded that a second image it provided had been manipulated, and released a statement saying it had recalled all photos by Hajj. "Reuters has withdrawn from its database all photographs taken by Beirut-based freelance Adnan Hajj after establishing that he had altered two images since the start of the conflict between Israel and the Lebanese Hizbullah group," the statement said.

The news outlet said that it discovered "in the last 24 hours that he (Hajj) altered two photographs since the beginning of the conflict between Israel and the Lebanese group Hizbullah," Reuters added.

“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.

'Tighter editing needed'

Reuters also said it would apply "tighter editing procedure for images of the Middle East conflict to ensure that no photograph from the region would be transmitted to subscribers without review by the most senior editor on the Reuters Global Pictures Desk."

"Reuters terminated its relationship with Hajj on Sunday... An immediate enquiry began into Hajj’s other work," the statement said.

Hajj had provided Reuters with several images from the Lebanese village of Qana, many of which have also been suspected of being staged .

Other Reuters images have been called into question by blogs in the United States.

A reader of the Power Line blog , Robert Opalecky, wrote: "I don't know if this has been brought to anyone's attention yet, but in a quick search of the authenticated Reuters photographs attributed to Adnan Hajj, I found the following two."

The first Reuters image of July 24

"One is from July 24 of a bombed out area in Beirut, with a clearly identifiable building in a prominent part of the shot. The second is of the exact same area, same buildings, same condition, with a woman walking past "a building flattened during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs August 5, 2006," he wrote.

Reuters' second 'Beirut attack' photo, dated August 5

A film released on the YouTube video sharing website compares the two images, and appears to show striking similarities between the photograph used by Reuters on both July 24 and August 5.

The Source

[cec]

At least they are standing up and facing the problem instead of trying to sweep it under the rug. I wonder how long it will take the photographer to change his name so he can sell more pictures?

[AndJusticeForAll]

I guess it should come as no surprise that Reuters, a German news agency, would be the one to be caught doctoring images to make the Jews look worse in the eyes of their readers and in the eyes of the world. I'll never fully trust the Germans or guys named Hajj.

[cec]

I wonder how many newspapers will print retractions on the photos they used?

[Woodmonkey]

If any do, I bet the corrections will be hidden towards the back of the newspaper.

[Snowden]

Reuters Admits Faking Photos, Still in Denial
By Rusty Shackleford
Wednesday, August 9, 2006


This weekend was not a good one for Reuters.

First, it was revealed by Charles Johnson of the Little Green Footballs blog that a photo showing bomb damage in Beirut by a local Muslim stringer, Adnan Hajj, was doctored. Reuters promptly recalled the image and fired the reporter.

Since the original unaltered photo revealed that there really was a large explosion being documented by Hajj, Reuters accepted his excuse that the picture was only altered to "remove some dust marks".

Accusations that the photo was “sexed-up” to make Israeli damage of Beirut seem worse were dismissed. The photo was treated as an isolated incident by Reuters. It wasn't.

Prompted by Charles Johnson's expose, a reader led me to another Reuters photo taken by Adnan Hajj. The photo purported to be of an Israeli F-16 firing "missiles" at a Lebanese village.

That photo was also a fake. The original photo actually showed an Israeli plane firing a defensive flare. The flare had been labeled a "missile" by the reporter and then duplicated several times using computer software to make it seem that multiple "missiles" were being "fired" on a Lebanese "village".

In other words, the F-16 which Reuters purports to show firing missiles at a Lebanese village, was taking defensive measures.

This time the "dust marks" excuse could not fly.

When confronted by a second obvious forgery, Reuters was forced to retract all 920 photos produced by Hajj.
But Reuters is still in denial about several things.

First, Reuters retraction order makes it seem as if the second photo was discovered by an internal investigation. An internal discovery of a second faked photo makes it appear that Reuters is a responsible and objective news organization which takes seriously accusations of impropriety. It is not.

Second, and more importantly, Reuters is in denial that there is an overtly anti-Israeli bias in its reports and their accompanying photos.

Why is it that no one at Reuters caught these two obvious forgeries? It doesn't seem too far fetched to suggest that editors do not scrutinize closely those things that they already believe to be true about Israel. The photos showed what Reuters already knew-- namely, that it is Israel that is responsible for so much death and damage in the present Middle East conflict.

Which is why Reuters is still in denial about many other photos which are not outright forgeries, but which appear to be staged?

Such as photos of Korans burning. Such as the bodies of children being paraded before reporters for hours.

What Reuters and others in the mainstream media do not disclose about all of their photos from Southern Lebanon is that no reporter is allowed in the area without Hezbollah approval. Even worse, many of the photos of Israeli "atrocities" are actually taken at organized tours put on by Hezbollah.

The images are real, but the photos are neither spontaneous nor do they tell the entire story.

Without the two forgeries it would be tempting to characterize the reporters at these staged events as victims of Hezbollah censorship. With the forgeries, it is now clear that many of these reporters are participants in a Hezbollah propaganda campaign against Israel.

Without the forgeries it would be hard to swallow the notion that the local Arab reporters employed by the larger news organizations were neutral and unbiased in this war. With the forgeries, it is clear that at least some are actually combatants and partisans on the propaganda front.

Reuters won't see this. Reuters can't see this. To the editors at Reuters, Israel is the cause of the miserable condition innocent Lebanese civilians find themselves in. Photos showing what they already believe to be true will not be scrutinized.

We seldom question that which we already believe.

So, while Reuters is frantically implementing new procedures meant to separate forged photos from authentic ones, do not expect to see much change in the content of those photos. We will still see the bodies of children. We will still see captions blaming Israeli aggression for their deaths.

Reuters does not need a new editorial process. What Reuters needs is moral clarity. Given their track record, don't hold your breath that it will come any time soon.


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/R...till_in_denial