The Media - Biased

nivi

Call me Ishmael
Joined
Apr 18, 2003
Messages
3,175
Location
Middle of nowhere, israel.
And heres proof:

Reuters admits altering Beirut photo

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

A Reuters photograph of smoke rising from buildings in Beirut has been withdrawn after coming under attack by American web logs. The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke and damage.

The photograph showed two very heavy plumes of black smoke billowing from buildings in Beirut after an Air Force attack on the Lebanese capital. Reuters has since withdrawn the photograph from its website, along a message admitting that the image was distorted, and an apology to editors.

Reuters withdraws doctored image

In the message, Reuters said that "photo editing software was improperly used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this advisory. We are sorry for any inconvience."

Ignored

Israeli war deaths go largely unnoticed / Yaakov Lappin

Hours after mother and two daughters are killed in Hizbullah rocket attack, media outlets around world fail to report deaths; meanwhile, British press continues anti-Israel tirade
Full Story

Reuters' head of PR Moira Whittle said in response: "Reuters has suspended a photographer until investigations are completed into changes made to a photograph showing smoke billowing from buildings following an air strike on Beirut. Reuters takes such matters extremely seriously as it is strictly against company editorial policy to alter pictures."

"As soon as the allegation came to light, the photograph, filed on Saturday 5 August, was removed from the file and a replacement, showing the same scene, was sent. The explanation for the removal was the improper use of photo-editing software," she added.

Earlier, Charles Johnson, of the Little Green Footballs blog , which has exposed a previous attempt at fraud by a major American news corporation, wrote : "This Reuters photograph shows blatant evidence of manipulation. Notice the repeating patterns in the smoke; this is almost certainly caused by using the Photoshop “clone” tool to add more smoke to the image."

'Blatant manipulation:' Has this photograph been distorted? (Photo: Reuters)

Johnson added: "Smoke simply does not contain repeating symmetrical patterns like this, and you can see the repetition in both plumes of smoke. There’s really no question about it."

A series of close ups are then posted on the blog, showing that "it’s not only the plumes of smoke that were 'enhanced.' There are also cloned buildings." The close ups do appear to show exact replicas of buildings appearing next to one another in the photograph.

The Sports Shooter web forum , used by professional photographers, also examined the photo, with many users concluding that the image has been doctored.

Threat From Reuters

Reuters employee issues 'Zionist pig' death threat / Yaakov Lappin

Worker suspended after telling American blogger: 'I look forward to day when you pigs get your throats cut'
Full Story

'Looks so obviously doctored'

"I'll second the cloned smoke...but it looks so obvious that I don't know how the photographer could have gotten away with it," wrote one user.

After further research, Johnson posted a photograph he says is the original image taken before distortions were made, showing much lighter smoke rising.

Other blogs have also analyzed the photographs, and reached similar conclusions, such as Left & Right , which states: "The photo has been doctored, quite badly."

The author of the Ace of Spades blog wrote: "Even I can see the very suspicious "clonings" of picture elements here. And I'm an idiot."

The Hot Air blog also looked at the photo, describing the image as "the worst Photoshop I have ever seen."

Some more proof:

Reuters employee issues 'Zionist pig' death threat

Worker suspended after telling American blogger: 'I look forward to day when you pigs get your throats cut'
Yaakov Lappin

A Reuters employee has been suspended after sending a death threat to an American blogger.

The message, sent from a Reuters internet account, read: "I look forward to the day when you pigs get your throats cut."

It was sent to Charles Johnson, owner of the Little Green Footballs (LGF) weblog, a popular site which often backs Israel and highlights jihadist terrorist activities.

In the threat, the Reuters staff member, who has not been named, left his email address as "zionistpig" at hotmail.com.

Reporting the message to his readers, Johnson wrote on his website: "This particular death threat is a bit different from the run of the mill hate mail we get around here, because an IP lookup on the sender reveals that he/she/it was using an account at none other than Reuters News."

Speaking to Ynetnews, Johnson said: "I was surprised to receive a threat from a Reuters IP, but only because it was so careless of this person to use a traceable work account to do it."

He added: "I think it's more than fair to say that Reuters has a big problem."

'Employee suspended'

After bringing the threat to the attention of Reuters, Johnson was told by the news organization's Global Head of Communications, Ed

Williams: "I can confirm that an employee has been suspended pending further investigation. The individual was not an employee of Reuters' news division."

In an additional twist, Johnson traced the movements of the sender of the threat, and found direct parallels between the internet locations of the sender and Inayat Bunglawala, Media Secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain.

Bunglawala, who contirbuted an editorial to the Guardian website, has attracted negative attention in the past after making anti-Semitic outbursts, and has declared that the British media was "Zionist-controlled."

In the comment section of the Guardian, underneath his own editorial, Bunglawala denied sending the threat, blaming "Zionists" instead.


"That was not me! Methinks some Zionists are up to mischief," he wrote.

"There is strong circumstantial evidence connecting Bunglawala to the threat, but there is no way for me to verify this for certain. Only a Reuters network administrator would have access to the necessary records," Johnson said.

A bit more:

Israeli war deaths go largely unnoticed

Hours after mother and two daughters are killed in Hizbullah rocket attack, media outlets around world fail to report deaths; meanwhile, British press continues anti-Israel tirade
Yaakov Lappin

Media bias? Hours after 60-year-old Fadia Jumaa and her two daughters, Samira, 31, and Sultana, 33, were killed by a Hizbullah rocket attack on their home in the Israeli-Bedouin village of Arab al-Aramshe, the international media has so far largely ignored their deaths.

Reuters was alone among non-Israeli media outlets to report the deaths, according to a Google news search, a number of hours after the first reports of the attack surfaced.

The lack of coverage of the Israeli civilian war casualties stands in marked contrast to the swift response by many sections of the international media to reported Lebanese casualties.

Meanwhile, the British press, which has produced some of the most venomous anti-Israel coverage during the war, has continued its tirade against Israel.

Inaccuracies

An article in the London-based Guardian, entitled "Militants merge with mainstream ," argues that Hizbullah has gained widespread, cross-religious support in the Arab world, and uses terms such as "the Qana massacre" to explain the apparent newfound unity.

The article argues that Sunnis and Shiites have come together in their backing of Hizbullah: "Whatever qualms Arabs once had about Hizbullah

they have since been dissipated by Israel's attacks, the hundreds of deaths, the sight of up to a quarter of the Lebanese population fleeing their homes, and especially the bombing of UN observers and the massacre at Qana. The Shiite organisation and its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, have become symbols of resistance even in such unlikely places as the Gulf countries where Sunnis and Shiites have been spotted waving the yellow-and-green flag."

The article was co-written by Issandr el-Amrani, a freelance journalist in Egypt who referred to Hizbullah as " Lebanese resistance fighters " on his personal blog and who describes reports of Hizbullah members operating out of civilian areas as "Israeli lies."

The article's authors failed, however, to note that an influential Saudi Sunni cleric, Sheikh Safar al-Hawali, has issued an anti-Hizbullah fatwa declaring that "Hizbullah is not the 'Party of God' but the 'Party of Satan.'"

An Associated Press report, which undermines the Guardian's claims, says that "Al-Hawali's words are an addition to a previous fatwa issued two weeks ago in Saudi Arabia by the leader of the Wahhabi movement, Sheikh Abdullah bin Jabrin, which declared that it is illegal to support, join, or even pray for Hizbullah."

BBC correspondent reports his own views

Meanwhile, an article has appeared on the BBC website in which a reporter for the British broadcaster, Hugh Sykes, relays a conversation he has with Lebanese residents.

The article is remarkable as it contains the views of a BBC journalist being given to Lebanese locals, rather than the other way around.

In the piece, written in first person narrative, Sykes tells people in Lebanon that there would be "no point" for Israel to strike Hizbullah targets in Lebanon: "'People keep asking me… ' Beirut - will they bomb Beirut again?' 'What would be the point?" I reply.'"

The BBC journalist also attempts to second guess where Israeli strikes hit.

"Four massive thumps one night, and six the next, as Israeli bombs or shells slammed into the ground a few kilometres away. Or into the children's homes," Sykes wrote.



http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3286880,00.html
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3286966,00.html#n
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3256534,00.html


Whoops, image deleted:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060805/photos_ts/2006_08_05t152933_450x304_us_mideast

This is how it looked:

http://imagesocket.com/view/reuters_fakee3e.png


Same vantage, diffrent time, undoctored; same vantage doctored, shows cloned buildings:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20060805BeirutPhotoshop07.gif

The real, undoctored image:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060806/ids_photos_wl/r1119244085.jpg




And these are only those who got caught.
 
Pretty sad when news outlets have to cheat and lie to make a point. Not like we can really enforce balanced reporting. I like just plain watching the news and make my own judgments, not worrying about bias left or right.

Again, its really bad for Reuters. I hope the liars are punished severely. When I first read the article I thought they just cloned a building here and there but the picture showed that the editing was huge.
 
You are not surprised are you? Here in the states we call them "Al Reuters" for the Middle East/Anti Western slant to about every story. The AP is just as bad.
 
Grass is green, water is wet, media are biased. Nothing new :) .
 
Stapel said:
Grass is green, water is wet, media are biased. Nothing new :) .


Gass isn't green its brown and dry and crumbles under foot. Well atleast mine is :(

The OP just goes to show how pathetic some people are.
 
The media has always been liberal biased, I guess we have to live with it. Liberals will always defend it though, and say that liberal media is an urban legend or something.
 
The media has always been liberal biased, I guess we have to live with it. Liberals will always defend it though, and say that liberal media is an urban legend or something.

Not all of it, but indeed, large sections of it tend to have a liberal slant - but hey, they are based in the cities, and thats what sells there. Furthermore, conservative media is just as bad as the liberal media. FOX news, anyone?

You have to understand that the Media is all private-run. Media corporations do what they do to get better ratings, and to get more money. "Fair and balanced" news is just a product slogan.

EDIT: I'd argue that FOX news has better ratings because of the appeal of its content - as most of middle class America, undeniably, is conservative - and not the fairness of its reportings. The liberal media is far too radical for most americans, and it just doesn't sit well.
 
MobBoss said:
This is why Foxnews has the best ratings around. They dont do this crap. Despite all the weeping and gnashing of teeth here, they are far more "fair and balanced" then any other news outlet around.
Yeah, they must be fair and balanced, they say they are every 5 minutes.
 
Bozo Erectus said:
Yeah, they must be fair and balanced, they say they are every 5 minutes.
Jealous that your liberal media is losing ground to FOX news, so you must make such under-the-table attacks against FOX news?
 
garric said:
The media has always been liberal biased, I guess we have to live with it. Liberals will always defend it though, and say that liberal media is an urban legend or something.
Didn't expect anything else from you but another liberal bashing post.
Word "liberal" might have many meanings. Very possible for you it means directly opposition to the conservatives.

Media has always had a role that questions everything especially the actions of those that hold the power. It's position is to be on the side of the lowly. Media loves underdogs. If that makes it liberal, then so be it. That's it holy mission.

Media "fails" giving accurate and truthful information as often as western military "makes mistakes" by hitting civilian targets. Humans are known to make errors. It doesn't make all the people of media or military crooked.

It's easy to get shot at if you are in front of soldiers or newsfolk.

garric said:
Jealous that your liberal media is losing ground to FOX news, so you must make such under-the-table attacks against FOX news?
If you can call Fox having fair and balanced views then I guess same could have been said about Goebbels.
 
Foxnews is pretty conservative, I can admit that, but thats ok considring most (what most? ALL!) others are liberal.
 
garric said:
Jealous that your liberal media is losing ground to FOX news, so you must make such under-the-table attacks against FOX news?
I watch neither liberal or conservative news unless Im compelled to because theres an important news story breaking. The news, regardless of its bias, is so dumbed down, its funny.
 
Methinks the title should be Reuters - biased. To be honest, if all media outlets seem biased (left or right) to you, then you generally have a very extreme viewpoint.
 
Of course theyre all biased. Nothing touched by the hand of Man is free of a bias.
 
Bozo Erectus said:
Of course theyre all biased. Nothing touched by the hand of Man is free of a bias.

That is true, but if you alter photos that is going a little bit further than slanting the facts in favor of your views. It moves beyond opinion and into deception. I have never bevieved much that came out of Reuters, I have even less reason to believe them now. Thus I call them Al Reuters.


Is FOX slanted, sure they are but to my knowledge they've never altered images to make a story and they do have both conservative and liberal reports, albeit more conservative then liberal. CNN, MSNBC, the formerally BIG 3 can't say that.
 
The television news is biased because its run by people. Its not written like a report.

Can you show me ANY HUMAN BEING that is not biased?
 
Yes media is liberal, if you want to be in the media buisness you have to be open minded and think outside the box. FOX news is a different story, they probably send people to reeducation camps or something.
 
Strangely enough, the press around here tend to report war deaths on both side.

Of course, given that there are SOMEWHAT more war deaths on one side than on the other, you hear more about the Lebanesse war deaths, but what do you expect? Hell, proportionally, an individual Israeli death probably get more coverage than an individual Lebanesse one.

As for the thread title, even "Reuters-biased" is questionable. "Some Reuters Employee - Biased" is the only thing that can be stated for a fact from the evidence in these articles.

More than that - as far as media bias goes, the title of the first article you posted is a shining example thereof.

What Reuter actually said (as per the article itself) : "One of our employee altered the picture. We have withdrawn it and suspenced the employee."
What the media titled the article : "Reuter admit to altering picture".

The third article "Most venomous anti-Israel tirade" et al - if that's not bias showing clean and clear (confusing "news report that do not favor Israel" with outright "anti-Israel tirade"), what is it?

This is the pot calling the kettle black - and someone probably washed the kettle recently.
 
Back
Top Bottom