In defense of war photographers.
By on Aug 24th, 2006 at 4:17 pm
In defense of war photographers.
“While some criticism is warranted, the current controversy over manipulated or staged pictures from Lebanon has been fueled by speculative, unfounded, or politically-driven charges that have tainted all of the brave photographers who cover conflict in the Middle East.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Because the republicans don’t want us to get the big picture.
August 24th, 2006 at 4:20 pmStill No Info on Terror War’s ‘Ghost Detainees’
Aaron Glantz
OneWorld US
Wed., Aug. 23, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Aug 23 (OneWorld) – The human rights group Amnesty International is appealing decisions by the United States government to withhold as secret information detailing the incarceration of so-called ghost detainees as part of the Bush administration’s self-styled “war on terror.”
The requests, which were submitted under the Freedom of Information Act with the help of the International Human Rights Clinic of New York University (NYU) School of Law, concern detainees who are–or have been–held by or with the involvement of the United States government, where there is no public record of the detentions.
August 24th, 2006 at 4:23 pmThe law requires the government to hand over relevant records within 10 working days, but four months later, Satterthwaite said she has received almost nothing.
Of course! Less photos means more lateral to lie.
For every crisis, turn turn turn/And if they don’t buy it, spin spin spin
August 24th, 2006 at 4:32 pmIt’s all part of the Right’s attempt to cast a reasonable amount of doubt on the messengers. That’s all they have left. I would bet that el-rushbo only has one photographer that he trusts and his own narcissistic, paranoid ass assumes that everyone is out to manipulate the truth except him.BTW, don’t you think that the constant desensitizing effect war photos have on us along with the increase in sheer volume of images of devastation that manipulating an image to increase it’s shock value has very little effect on the viewers? If Judy Miller can fudge a story about WMDs what’s a little photoshop to add vibrance and an enhanced level of provocation?
August 24th, 2006 at 4:33 pmWhat the whole scandal made me do is wonder how much journalistic photoshopping is going in general and how can we the folksies tell?
How do I know that ANY photograph corresponding to ANY story hasn’t been manipulated. The only way is if there are multiple photographers all covering the same thing. If there is a lone photographer, though, how can you trust the images?
August 24th, 2006 at 4:40 pmJake. Here is a maifesto worth reading.
August 24th, 2006 at 4:45 pmhttp://www.asne.org/ideas/codes/nppa.htm
Excuse me I skipped spell check, manifesto, sorry.
August 24th, 2006 at 4:46 pm#5
I’m a graphic designer by trade. And I’ve thought about it a lot.
I saw the photoshopped pictures, and they were pretty obvious to me. My issue is exactly what you stated: they sacrificed this guy, to cover up WHOELSE? I say that because this guys work is SO BAD, from a photo editing standpoint, that ANYONE in the industry would pick it out of a batch of 50 similiar pictures as an obvious fake. So that means it’s a plant. To draw attention to him obviously, but too obviously. So who or what are they drawing attention from?
August 24th, 2006 at 4:56 pmOT
August 24th, 2006 at 5:01 pmA federal judge has ruled that journalists’ phones can be tapped.
Investigative journalists investigate, but they will be further hamstrung now in their digging for the truth.
Ok guys, but seriously there are clear examples of war photographers doctoring photos so let’s not fall into the trap of spinning the opposite way. It’s unfortunate that some photographers chose to cast doubt on their accuracy and legitimacy by doing so, but unfortunately they will have to deal with the consequences of those actions. If the same photographers were doctoring photos with a clear Israeli bias you would be asking for their heads! Sheesh.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:02 pmThe point is not so much the doctoring of the photos, as it is what the story of doctored photos does to public opinion. And then, consequently, what kind of censorship it allows. Doctoring goes on all the time. We must not allow a narrowing of the amount of sources we get our photos from, otherwise ‘doctoring’ will become more prevalent, not less.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:08 pmAnyone that believes there was widespread wanton destruction, they need only go over to Google and check the satellite picks of Lebanon. Clearly there is NO widespread damage; this indicates a pinpoint bombing campaign. If the Israelis wanted to reckless destroy a city and terrorize a population they would have used the Hezbollah method of firing unguided rockets filled with steel balls. Arabs know the truth like fire knows the water.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:08 pmIf there is a lone photographer, though, how can you trust the images?
Comment by Jake
August 24th, 2006 at 5:26 pm====================================================
As a former photo journalist I can tell you that photoshoping a photo leaves definite tells.
I look at so called huanting photos all the time and the manipulations are always obvious to anyone that has used photoshop. Using the program to add smoke or to make a shot more dramatic is just a waste of time you will always get caught.
Yet right the Israelis were just gunning for kids, women, mosques, nursery schools, shopping centers, pizza places, coffee houses, bars, and just normal CIVILIAN houses. Oh wait that is what the ARABS target. Yes, now I see your warped moral equivalence. Oh and BTW the name calling is very immature, next get a note from Mom so you can play with the big kids, thank you for the concern of my soul, and other than a party animal I have no other relations in that area. :-(
August 24th, 2006 at 5:27 pmWhat determines the impression of wanton widespread destruction? The contents of a photograph, the copy by itself or a combination of both? Desolate carnage is relative, it depends on to who’s relatives it happens to.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:29 pmClearly there is NO widespread damage; this indicates a pinpoint bombing campaign.
You contradict yourself and sully your nation by makign such claims. Pinpoint bombing strikes do not kill civillian children. Pinpoint bombing does not produce high incidents of collateral damage.
I can only assume you meant that there hasn’t been a lot of ‘infrastructure’ damage. Your rhetoric exposes you for the monster you are, and as a true American, i hope you get deported to a pinpoint bombing site so you can get a full grasp of just how spurious any claims at percision are.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:32 pmI remember back in the late 70’s or so seeing for the first time bombed out cafes in Rome and other spots in Europe and to this day it’s all pretty much the same. Carnage is carnage and very little effects me. Whether it’s a disaster man made or not I think very few single images can add something unexpected to the news of an event. There will always be images of victims and copy to support the reason, if any for their predicament.Whether it’s from the NRO(Natl Reconnaissance Office) or James Natchwey it’s still carnage.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:49 pmIf’in ya wants to see some MOST manipulated pics just check my blog.
August 24th, 2006 at 6:26 pm
#14, pinpoint bombing? Are you nuts?!
August 24th, 2006 at 6:39 pm1000 civilians, most women and children were killed and maimed, not to mention the horrific damage to infrastructure upon which the citizenry depend for daily life.
I am always struck by the cold and militaristic view you have of everything upon which you comment. Your mind appears to be closed to anything contrary to that which you have a pre-formed opinion. That sounds like a person who depends on his news from the fact-free Fox network or the equally fact-free drug-addicted radio host.
I am sorry for you.
an opinion
What evidence do you have that it was reuters and not the photographer? We both know any photographer could have a laptop on assignment and do a questionable photoshop job and people would consume it, especially the folks who love to hate Israel. It’s far less fetched than Reuters hatching a scheme to discredit it’s OWN contracted photographers. Why hasn’t the photographer come out said something to support your argument? Wouldn’t he have a vested interest in saving his reputation as a photojournalist? Or did the evil Zionists at Reuters somehow shut him up?
I believe the photographer who Reuters bought the photo from was a Lebanese photojournalist, wouldn’t it makes more sense that enraged by the destruction of his country, he decided to doctor a photo to influence public opinion?
Just sayin’.
August 24th, 2006 at 7:38 pmP.S. Are you arguing the the US and Israel are the ONLY countries in recent history (let’s say after WW I) to engage in pre-emptive war?
Also, i think your last statement is ludcirously unfair and unfounded. Think on this, during and after this current war, Israelis were on the streets protesting the olmert admin’s handling of the conflict. Where were the Lebanese protesting the capture of Israel’s soldiers and the subsequent 8 deaths as a result of Hezbollah’s incursion?
August 24th, 2006 at 7:51 pmAlso, from the Article:
Adnan Hajj, the Reuters photographer who doctored at least two images, deserved to be dismissed.
If Reuters did the images up, why was Mr. Hajj dismissed from Reuters?
Lots of questions, I’ll shut up now and let you answer :-)
August 24th, 2006 at 8:09 pm#28: Are you offering your post as evidence that Reuters, and not Hajj, doctored the smoke photos from Lebanon? Basically your argument is “Nobody could be that stupid.” Well, of course people do stupid things. It happens all the time. Your argument doesn’t hold water, as far as I’m concerned.
I do think it’s alarming that Hajj’s photos got past an editor, and I do believe that this should be investigated.
August 24th, 2006 at 9:12 pmRetired Republican Soldier, I won’t call you any names. I will just tell you how I feel. Clearly you and I have different values, and your values, which I see as an extreme form of moral relativism (”we’re not quite as bad as Saddam!”) make me sick. I find your casual dismissal of civilian casualties to be utterly repulsive.
August 24th, 2006 at 9:38 pmExcellent comments, j, and excellent points.
August 24th, 2006 at 9:56 pmWar is all lies. what you hear, what you read, what you see.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:16 pm#34 see #16
August 24th, 2006 at 10:19 pm#37 zooey is a frequent poster on this site.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:25 pmMmm Hmmm…
August 24th, 2006 at 10:26 pmj, you’re being just too cute. You know that, don’t you?
August 24th, 2006 at 10:28 pmYeah, this kind of nonsense of staged photgraphs also comes from people who say the Qana tragedy was staged and that the children being pulled out were acting and sleeping. What kind of disturbed individuals could say a thing like that?
And some on Fox News said that the rubble of buildings from Israel fire, was really the result of weak building foundations, that suddenly began to collapse all over Lebanon.
This is nonsense. The fact that the media thinks it can get away with this kind of stuff, just goes to show how little they think most Americans will analyze news stories. But things are changing: viewership of CNN and Fox News is on the decline, and more people are turning to alternative news sources. It is about time.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:44 pm#32: i believe that someone at reuters manipulated the photograph and pretended it was submitted by hajj in an attempt to discredit ALL war photographers
Ah, now I understand your argument. I disagree with it, but at least now I understand it. I have a lot of trouble believing that some conspirator snuck into Reuters’s editorial office and got the photoshopped pics into the article. More likely that Hajj isn’t very bright. Did you hear Hajj’s explanation, that he was “trying to remove dust marks and that he made mistakes due to the bad lighting conditions he was working under”? That sounds to me like an admission that he had photoshopped the image himself. If Hajj himself hadn’t touched the photos before sending them in to Reuters, why admit that he did?
August 24th, 2006 at 10:44 pm#41: j, you’re being just too cute. You know that, don’t you?
August 24th, 2006 at 10:45 pmThank you.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:46 pm:-)
August 24th, 2006 at 10:48 pm:-)
;-O
August 24th, 2006 at 10:53 pmWait, I thought I was “j.”
August 24th, 2006 at 10:55 pmNo, I’m “j.” Get it straight, you guitar-setting-on-fire lunatic.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:56 pmThere’s only one j, sorry, Jimi.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:57 pmThis is very disturbing.
August 24th, 2006 at 10:58 pmPresident Carter,
Tell me, is it true you have lusted in your heart?
August 24th, 2006 at 10:59 pmYou said it, Jimmy.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:00 pm#52: Tell me, is it true you have lusted in your heart?
Only for you, my darling.
Well, and Margaret Thatcher, in her way, was awfully fetching.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:02 pmPresident Carter,
I never knew! Has it been you senidng me peanuts and Billy Beer, all these years?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:05 pm#55: I never knew! Has it been you senidng me peanuts and Billy Beer, all these years?
Please. Call me Jimmy. Everyone else does.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:08 pmJimmy. :)
Damn, I’m glad no one else is on here, they’d be pissed…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:12 pm#57: I’m glad no one else is on here, they’d be pissed…
Just try to imagine how pissed Rosalynn would be.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:18 pmRosalynn and I and tight, Jimmy. She just felt like a little sugar tea this evenin’.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:20 pmBesides, John Quincy Adams was just here a little while ago. I hope he comes back because I wanted to ask him why he failed to get the nation to adopt the metric system.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:22 pm#59: That’s “sweet tea,” my sweet.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:23 pmHe had to go powder his wig, and buy some ruffles for his shirt, or make some beer or something.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:24 pmYou wanna fight, Jimmy?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:25 pm#63: You wanna fight, Jimmy?
You’ll have to fight me, too. We ex-Presidents stick together.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:28 pmBrown Sugar Tea
0.50 c Milk
2.00 tb Brown sugar
1.00 Cinnamon stick
1.50 c Black tea
0.50 c Heavy cream, whipped
Ground cinnamon for garnish
Combine the milk, brown sugar, and cinnamon stick in a saucepan and simmer over low heat for 1-2 min, stirring occasionally. Add the tea and stir so that all of the ingredients are mixed together. Pour this mixture into 2 cups, top with whipped cream and sprinkle with cinnamon.
It’s disgusting.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:28 pmPut up yer dukes, even if you are a woman.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:29 pm#65: That sounds vile. Then again, we northerners have far more civilized tastes.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:30 pmSo many President James…
…even if you are a woman. Yeah, you finally figured it out.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:31 pm#67 – Now you know why southern women lose their grip on reality…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:32 pm#68: Yeah, you finally figured it out.
I’m no dummy, even if I did start he Mexican War.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:34 pm#69: Now you know why southern women lose their grip on reality…
Reminds me of my poor dear Marilyn…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:36 pmPresident Buchanan,
Why did you never marry? Are you the smartest president?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:36 pm#68: So many President James…
So, what am I, chopped liver?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:37 pmPresident Kennedy,
Sorry about the head, and all.
No Faux News in your day — lucky, eh?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:39 pm#72: Why did you never marry? Are you the smartest president?
In a manner of speaking. My faithful housekeeper, Miss Hetty Parker, did a bit more than care for my nieces and nephews, if you can catch my drift.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:41 pmSo, what am I, chopped liver?
Comment by John Tyler
You’re no President James, Tippecanoe.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:41 pm#75 – More than one way to polish a floor…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:42 pm#74: Sorry about the head, and all.
You just had to bring that up, didn’t you? Well, I never did consider my head my most valuable asset.
No Faux News in your day — lucky, eh?
I suppose. That Laurie Dhue is quite something, though, isn’t she?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:44 pm#76: You’re no President James, Tippecanoe.
He’s no Tippecanoe, either. That was me. That was I.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:46 pm#77: More than one way to polish a floor…
…Or scrub a sink…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:47 pm#80: Good one, William! Recovered from your pneumonia, I see…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:48 pmThat Laurie Dhue is quite something, though, isn’t she?
Comment by John F. Kennedy
If you like the type that buys lip gloss by the 55 gallon drum…
He’s no Tippecanoe, either. That was me. That was I.
Comment by William Henry Harrison
Shit, I knew that was wrong. Sorry Bill.
…Or scrub a sink…
Comment by William Henry Harrison
You’ll never find the spider webs on the ceiling that way…
August 24th, 2006 at 11:52 pmGuys…presidents & James, it’s been fun, but it’s time to go. My baby is leaving tomorrow, and I’ve got to get him packed up and ready.
Hope I see you tomorrow — you know I’ll spot you!
Goodnight, James.
August 24th, 2006 at 11:56 pm#83: Sweet dreams.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:04 am#83: Marry me? No one else would.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:08 am#85: Marry me? No one else would.
Well, maybe someone would have, if you’d listened to me and kept slavery from spreading into the western territories. Jeesh.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:13 am#83: Don’t let the bedbugs bite.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:14 am#82: You’ll never find the spider webs on the ceiling that way…
No, but I’ll bet they shook loose the rust behind the faucet.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:21 amGood heavens.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:27 amDon’t let the bedbugs bite.
Comment by James
I really ought to wash the sheets…
August 25th, 2006 at 2:19 amYou’ll never find the spider webs on the ceiling that way…
No, but I’ll bet they shook loose the rust behind the faucet.
Comment by William Henry Harrison
Now that’s what I’m talkin’ about! :-)
Goodnight James!
August 25th, 2006 at 2:20 amMore smoke in the photos dont change the facts on the ground, but it is very useful in blowing smoke up the ass of american public opinion by the ministry of propaganda
August 25th, 2006 at 2:36 am[...] In defense of war photographers.Think Progress, DC - 10 hours ago While some criticism is warranted, the current controversy over manipulated or staged pictures from Lebanon has been fueled by speculative, unfounded, or … [...]
August 25th, 2006 at 2:45 am#31
So what your saying is that you just can’t believe he could do it….but you haven’t addressed any of my questions really.
I find it curious that you would find it more likely that a Reuters editor Photoshopped the images to cast doubt on all wartime photojournalists,which in turn strikes fear into our hearts and assits in propagandizing for the Israelis and the Bush Admin, than a situation where an empassioned Lebanese photojournalist caught up in the destruction of South Beirut and his feelings of hatred towards Israel allows his professionalism to fall to the wayside and doctor an image to sway public opinion the world over.
So far your only argument is, “His editor and he were idiots if they did this, it’s SUUUUCH a bad job!”, but the photographer was canned, and he hasn’t said a thing in his own defense, so my suggestion seems far more likely.
Talk about spin, you know, you remind me of……well, .the Bush admin actualy.
August 25th, 2006 at 3:37 amCost of Iraq war: $1,075 each
The National Priorities Project has calculated the cost of the Iraq war by congressional district, city, state and even household.
August 25th, 2006 at 4:46 amYou each owe $1,075.
Good Morning all,………….Mumbo Jumbo, don’t forget the national debt price tag, close to 29,000 each so look’s like we all owe around 30 big one’s……
For the benefit of the bull shit bush accounting office may I submit ……..I will send off my check of what I think I owe just as soon as this crazy bunch in office send in their check’s and leave office………Providing I live that long.
This entire photo thing is just so much madness….One tenth of the coverage through out all the bush wars has been released to the public……..From the get go it has been supress anything negative or truthful. ..Case in point the flag draped coffins…This entire mess has been advertising, not truth.Ofcourse you all knew that….
Having worked in the photo industry for many years I do have extensive knoledge of what can be done to photos and now with the photo work shops and digital it is amazing…..Now in a second things can be put in or removed that use to take me hours with the air brush and photo paints…….I could make a 70 year old look like a 25 year old….Remove X spouses and put in a tree or add a missing family member to a new photo…..Art work and copy neg’s were the norm and now it’s delete or add and bounce the curser all over the page…Sadly we can not replace the lives lost in the bombings…..Smoking bomb clouds inhanced are realy not the issue for me, the loss of lives on the ground are………Blessings….Peace
August 25th, 2006 at 8:17 amToday, not only have reporters from the New York Times been imprisoned for refusing to divulge information that would compromise the privacy of informants, there is a small, yet growing movement among the neoconservatives which seeks to imprison all journalists who aren’t “with the program.”
For instance, Senator Jim Bunning has recently gone on record calling for editors at the Times to be tried for treason. Why? Because the curmudgeon editors are supposedly putting the freedoms of Americans in jeopardy; for publishing the fact that the government is secretly checking the bank records of Americans.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:02 amJew hating…no longer just for rednecks.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:22 amMumbo Jumbo, like every thing else in this administration it is kill the messenger and lies for truth….Back to the “If you’re not with us you are against us” mentalety….Sickning and very natziesk thinking…Rovian or chaneism my guess..Blessings
August 25th, 2006 at 9:56 amSharon,
Looks like its a wash with what I owe in National Debt and what I have already paid into the Social Security system, both about the same. Can I call it a day?
August 25th, 2006 at 11:56 am