Reuters Alters Images Again

Joecoolyo

99% Lightspeed
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
9,908
Location
茨城県
Found this via Digg

The Reuters news agency has been accused of removing images of activists wielding weapons and bloodied and wounded Israeli naval commandos from photographs taken on board a ship headed for Gaza during deadly clashes last week.
Nine people were killed and dozens others, among them Israel Defense Forces soldiers, were hurt when the clashes erupted as IDF troops tried to board the Mavi Marmara ship in order to prevent it reaching its destination in Gaza.

The ship was one of six vessels that made up the "Freedom Flotilla," a convoy carrying aid that set out from Turkey in an attempt to break Israel's blockade on the Gaza Strip. Five of the boats in the convoy were boarded by IDF troops without incident, while passengers on the sixth fought the troops as they came onboard. All six boats were towed by the Israel Navy to the Israeli port city of Ashdod.

Reuters on Monday rejected accusations of biased coverage, adding that it had reverted to the use of "the original set" of images, once the organization realized that the photographs it had published had been cropped.

A Reuters spokesman told Haaretz: "Reuters is committed to an accurate and impartial reporting. All images that pass over our wire follow a strict editorial evaluation and selection process.

"The images in question were made available in Istanbul in following normal editorial practice were prepared for dissemination which included cropping at the edges. When we realized that the dagger was inadvertently cropped from the images Reuters immediately moved to the original set as well.”

This is not the first time that Reuters has been criticized for images that appear to be biased against Israel. During the Second Lebanon War in 2006, the news agency admitted that one of its pictures of destruction caused by Israel's bombing of Beirut had been altered with a computer graphics program.

Political commentator Tom Gross told Haaretz that "this isn’t the first time Reuters had been caught altering photos to make them less sympathetic to Israel. They did so, for example, in the 2006 Lebanon war."

"Everyone makes mistakes, including journalists, but every time Reuters says it makes a mistake, it does so to Israel’s detriment, and this looks suspiciously like a deliberate pattern."

"The father of Julius Reuter – the German Jew who founded Reuters – was a rabbi. He must be turning in his grave at how Reuters if helping to stir up delegtimization against the Jewish state."

For one of the pictures, you have to visit the article; because they put it in some widget thing and I can't get them standalone (so I could put them here).

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...s-blood-from-images-of-gaza-flotilla-1.294780

The other picture I found from Fox News (ugh, I know) via Digg again.

Cropped%20Image-Reuters%201_doomsday_604x341.JPG


On the left, the uncropped photo. On the right, Reuters' released photo.

Here's the Fox News article if anyone actually wants to read it.

The British-based Reuters news agency has been stung for the second time by charges that it edited politically sensitive photos in a way that casts Israel in a bad light. But this time Reuters claims it wasn’t at fault.

The news agency reacted to questions raised by an American blogger who showed that Reuters' photo service edited out knives and blood traces from pictures taken aboard the activist ship Mavi Marmara during a clash with Israeli commandos last week. Nine people were killed and scores were injured in the clash.

The pictures of the fight were released by IHH, the Turkish-based group that sponsored the six-ship fleet that tried to break Israel's blockade of Gaza.

In one photo, an Israeli commando is shown lying on the deck of the ship, surrounded by activists. The uncut photo released by IHH shows the hand of an unidentified activist holding a knife. But in the Reuters photo, the hand is visible but the knife has been edited out.

The blog “Little Green Footballs” challenged Reuters' editing of the photo.

“That’s a very interesting way to crop the photo. Most people would consider that knife an important part of the context. There was a huge controversy over whether the activists were armed. Cropping out a knife, in a picture showing a soldier who’s apparently been stabbed, seems like a very odd editorial decision. Unless someone was trying to hide it,” the blog stated.

In a second photo the unedited print issued by IHH showed blood along the ship's railing and a hand holding a knife as an Israeli soldier lies on the deck. Both the blood and the knife were missing in the photo that Reuters released.

Reuters on Tuesday denied it intended to alter the political meanings of the photographs.

“The images in question were made available in Istanbul, and following normal editorial practice were prepared for dissemination which included cropping at the edges," the news agency said in a statement. "When we realized that a dagger was inadvertently cropped from the images, Reuters immediately moved the original set as well."

Reuters has yet to respond to charges about the second photo.

This is the second time Reuters has been accused of manipulating photos. In 2006 a Reuters photographer, Adnan Hajj, doctored several photos of the destruction caused by Israel's bombing of Beirut. In one he added smoke to a panoramic picture of South Beirut to make the damage look more severe than it was. In a second photo, he showed a woman whose home had supposedly been destroyed in the same raid, but an investigation revealed that the woman's house had been destroyed prior to the Israeli strike.

Reuters later removed all of Hajj's more than 900 photos from distribution and severed its relationship with him. A photo editor also was fired.

What happened on the Mavi Marmara and who was responsible for the killing and bloodshed on the ship is still a matter of debate. Activists charge that Israeli commandos fired first and provoked the skirmish. Israeli commandos say they were compelled to use deadly force after they were attacked by people on board the ship.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/06/08/reuters-fake-photos-ihh-gaza-blockade-commandos/
 
eh this seems like a big stretch. The whole image was cropped on all sides and the image is of what the activists did to a Israeli soldier so if Reuters wanted to be political they could just not distribute the photo.

While were at it the activists can claim Reuters is purposefuly making them look reckless by editing out thier lifejackets.
 
Last I read Reuters got the images from another source, and took them down as soon as they realized they had been cropped.

You mean as soon as someone outside of Reuters pointed it out....:lol:
 
Listen, if you don't think that almost every single image published in the media is cropped or resized in some way, you are an idiot...
 
Listen, if you don't think that almost every single image published in the media is cropped or resized in some way, you are an idiot...

Cropping or resizing to fit a page or something is entirely different to cropping/resizing it to edit out pertinent parts of the photo. They could have run the photo with the knife being seen just as well as the cropped version without the knife. Someone just didnt want the 'humanitarians' to be seen wielding weapons.
 
Cropping or resizing to fit a page or something is entirely different to cropping/resizing it to edit out pertinent parts of the photo. They could have run the photo with the knife being seen just as well as the cropped version without the knife. Someone just didnt want the 'humanitarians' to be seen wielding weapons.

Well, it's still a bunch of protesters standing over a bloodied israeli soldier, isn't that damning enough on its own?
 
Well, it's still a bunch of protesters standing over a bloodied israeli soldier, isn't that damning enough on its own?

Not really. Heck, in that scenario, couldnt you make the argument they were trying to protect him? Some passengers did indeed give testimony that they tried to shield the boarders from violence didnt they?

But whats the problem with showing the photo AS IS? Is the truth of the situation too much for some people to handle?
 
Cropping or resizing to fit a page or something is entirely different to cropping/resizing it to edit out pertinent parts of the photo. They could have run the photo with the knife being seen just as well as the cropped version without the knife. Someone just didnt want the 'humanitarians' to be seen wielding weapons.

Where do you buy your tinfoil hats, MobBoss?

Moderator Action: If you are not going to contribute meaningfully, don't bother to post at all please.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
Not really. Heck, in that scenario, couldnt you make the argument they were trying to protect him? Some passengers did indeed give testimony that they tried to shield the boarders from violence didnt they?

Maybe they were trying to protect them with knives? Maybe he was planning on doing some impromptu surgery on the injured? Maybe he was cutting upa mars bar to share with him in a gesture of peace?

I like caption games :)

But whats the problem with showing the photo AS IS? Is the truth of the situation too much for some people to handle?

Well, it could have been deliberate, or it could have just been a crop to make sure that it was distinguishable at a certain size. Either way, I think it's those little words under the picture that make the real difference...
 
Maybe they were trying to protect them with knives?

Thats not very believeable.

Maybe he was planning on doing some impromptu surgery on the injured?

Even less so.

Maybe he was cutting upa mars bar to share with him in a gesture of peace?

No one I know likes blood on their Mars Bar.

Well, it could have been deliberate, or it could have just been a crop to make sure that it was distinguishable at a certain size.

What is indistinguishable at the original size that is more distinguishable in the crop?
 
Thats not very believeable.

Wasn't really going for beleivability in any of those scenarios, just making the point that any picture needs a bit of verbal/written context to draw any real conclusions from it.

What is indistinguishable at the original size that is more distinguishable in the crop?

Frankly I have no idea. Maybe it would make all the difference in one of those little icon pics next to web stories? Whatever the reason, I just don't smell conspiracy, unless there's something sinister about reuter's I don't know about....
 
New agencies resize photos different all the time because of scale and size considerations. If you cant work out why, then you shouldn't be posting in a thread about this.
 
Cropping or resizing to fit a page or something is entirely different to cropping/resizing it to edit out pertinent parts of the photo. They could have run the photo with the knife being seen just as well as the cropped version without the knife. Someone just didnt want the 'humanitarians' to be seen wielding weapons.

Its hardly an uncommon weapon. Its not like they cropped out an AK. Its no bigger than a kitchen knife ferchrissake.
 
New agencies resize photos different all the time because of scale and size considerations. If you cant work out why, then you shouldn't be posting in a thread about this.

The cropping didn't seem to change the relative dimensions (horizontal v vertical) of the image.
 
New agencies resize photos different all the time because of scale and size considerations. If you cant work out why, then you shouldn't be posting in a thread about this.
Indeed. What I find really ironic here is that we have no idea how much creative cropping, or even creative Photoshopping, the Israelis did to the original image, since they have yet to release their own raw footage or any of the raw video or raw images taken by the protestors.

The cropping didn't seem to change the relative dimensions (horizontal v vertical) of the image.
That is because whoever created that composite image quite likely resized one or both of the images to fit the size they wanted. Once again, cropping and resizing is a very common practice. There is nothing inherently "evil" about it. Did they try to destroy all the other images and replace it with this one?

I really can't believe people are actually whining about supposed Reuters propaganda efforts when the Israelis have been doing nothing but propagandizing by selectively releasing highly edited video and images since day one. When do you think they will ever release all the raw video they took and all the raw video and photos the protestors took? Never? Much of it may even be already destroyed for quite obvious reasons. Why aren't you complaining about that?
 
Well, one is supposed to condemn propaganda on both sides.
 
Back
Top Bottom