"Editors later confronted the photographer and determined that most of the images did not wholly reflect the reality they purported to show. Had the editors known that the photographs had been digitally manipulated, they would not have published the picture essay, which has been removed from the NYTimes.com," the note concluded.
At least The Paper of (the variable) Record cleared that up rather than stonewalling. No word if the guys responsible have been sacked and sent to work in Iranian government pixel mines.
9 comments:
See, if they'd run a disclaimer at the front end that "Some of photos included in this essay have been digitally altered for aesthetic reasons. Unaltered copies are available upon request," and if that sort of disclaimer was standard policy on photos and articles, I doubt the industry would be in the trouble it's in today. But nooooo, they're all "we are the bringers of truth to the ignorant masses." Sheesh.
Worse, in this case the NYT specifically claimed the photographer did not perform any manipulations on the photos.
If you really want to see how full of it the photographer was, read this preening interview with him.
"In my work I always strive for a dynamic play of reality and fiction, prioritizing poetic memory over concrete topographies. The lack of temporal reference and people is also important. It provide the viewer with a canvas on which to project his/her ideas, memories, thoughts, experiences, or even a narrative. But more importantly it provides a blank canvas on which to project his or her humanity."
Blech. And in that interview he likewise claims that he never uses darkroom or computer manipulation.
I don't think it's so much about Evil Photoshop as it is about the Times' embarrassment at being caught being fooled:
...the text that preceded the six photos that were published, the magazine stated that while the photographer "creates images with long exposures," he does so without digital manipulation.
(This thing was a "photo essay," furcryinoutloud. That alone should warn any reader that the resemblance to reality may be only as close as that of a Maureen Dowd column.)
I'd be more impressed if I didn't remember how the photo that accompanied the Times' coverage of Newt's Contract With America announcement had the backdrop (a banner listing the contract's points) obviously fuzzed "in the lab".
-------
TW: "prehanti" - something vaguely obscene associated with anime
"I'd be more impressed if I didn't remember how the photo that accompanied the Times' coverage of Newt's Contract With America announcement had the backdrop (a banner listing the contract's points) obviously fuzzed "in the lab"."
Kind of like the way the actual Contract's points were fuzzed "in the House". ;)
Ironic that the Noo Yawk Timez was founded by the first chairman of the Republican Party.
FWIW, the Times' editor-in-chief said several years ago the the NYSlimes was no longer a "newspaper of record" because that would prevent them from presenting their editorial views, which used to be listed in the Wikipedia article on "Newspaper of Record"... Although they seem to have changed their minds, because there is now no record (heh) of that fact anywhere on Wikipedia...
Sure, every other kind of manipulation is perfectly fine though. *rolleyes*
What still puzzles me is the Times' insistence, without being asked, that the photos had not been manipulated. Why, of all the pics they run, did they deem it needful to make that (false) assertion up front?
"Had the editors known that the photographs had been digitally manipulated, they would not have published the picture essay, which has been removed from the NYTimes.com,"
Yeah, sure, no doubt.
I wonder where Dan Rather is these days. Maybe he's moonlighting as an editor for the NYT. -- Lyle
Like politicians, Pravda West's editors mouths move up and down when they talk. Anyone whose mouth moves up and down when they talk is subject to telling lies.
Therefore, anyone whose mouth moves up and down when they talk must be watched closely for an extended period of time in order to determine whether or not they have contracted Ananias Disease.
Those with active Ananias should be kept from all forms of spoken or written communications. Such exposure invariably leads to Hashimoto's encephalopathy, with accompanying political delusions ending in full blown Munchausen Syndrome centered on the area of Lenin's tomb.
Or, as the old country boy says, "Them idjit's crazy ez betsy bugs."
Stranger
Post a Comment