Some Lebanon photos faked

by R. Isible Tue Aug 08, 2006 15:33

Especially this one from "henry8":
The only thing you can take for granted in this war is that every charlie in the west is the target of a massive media offensive by both parties and that we (the public) are so far down the chain of information that everything we receive is so tainted by partizanship and spin that it becomes meaningless.

by ??? Tue Aug 08, 2006 15:56

Links in main story not working. The littlegreenfootballs site itself seems to be down.

by R. Isible Tue Aug 08, 2006 16:15

they were having server slowdowns a day or so ago

by M Cotton Tue Aug 08, 2006 16:59

'The only thing you can take for granted in this war is that every charlie in the west is the target of a massive media offensive by both parties and that we (the public) are so far down the chain of information that everything we receive is so tainted by partizanship and spin that it becomes meaningless.'

Frankly, this is nothing but supercilious, smart-arse bullshit imo. It's also a form of insidious encouragement for the 'little people' not to bother their 'little heads' about any of this: the clear inference to be drawn is if nothing we read is reliable then there is no point in reading it. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence and interest in the issue does not have to search too hard for reliable insights into the various perspectives in any case. Underlying it all, as usual, is the US masterplan for domination of the Middle East and the access to oil and strategic control that it is ruthlessly pursuing. Follow the money.

by M.Dugan Tue Aug 08, 2006 17:12

I found it here, evidently rueters admits the photographs were "Enhanced"

by M. Dugan Tue Aug 08, 2006 17:14

You can see some of the Photographs here as well

by R. Isible Tue Aug 08, 2006 19:15

Anyone with a modicum of intelligence and interest in the issue does not have to search too hard for reliable insights into the various perspectives in any case

What's under question here is the reliability of supposed eye-witness reports, on-the-scene photographs etc., not whether "various perspectives" are illuminated by "reliable insights". There are obviously gross distortions of the truth being carried out by major news organisations and the crude, poorly-executed ones (that can be detected by eyeballing images) are exposed. Makes you wonder how many well-executed ones pass us by. One of the Guardian commenteers points out that in the past playing around with the chemicals used in development and actual airbrushing were the preserve of talented professionals, but that the outsourcing/deprofessionalisation of journalism has meant that photographers often do their own poor "enhancements".

And it's not just this one, but also the "green helmet guy". Hizbollah would be foolish indeed if they didn't realise that media spin is a big part of modern war. On the other side of the coin are the very widespread lies about Hizbollah using civilians as human shields and deliberately targetting Israeli civilians (as opposed to being callous about the "collateral damage").

Any "reliable insight" into "various perspectives" has to be founded on some sort of original facts, and those facts often acquire their status as "facts" because of being reported by some reliable body e.g. Reuters or Human Rights Watch or whoever.

Reuters has somewhat redeemed itself by pulling these photos, but it emphasises that over-reliance on emotional, spectacular evidence (some of the questionable photographs have been used in posts on indymedia.ie's newswire as evidence for the horror of Israel's actions) as opposed to large-picture models/analysis can lead to a compromised position for anti-war activists.

I wouldn't immediately draw the negative conclusion that you seem to from "henry8's" post. I'd agree with him that everything we receive through the media is completely distorted (Chomsky/Hermann's propaganda model already predicts this) and that on top of that there are complete outright lies becoming more prevalent during the last years of war (the WMD lie, the AlQ in Iraq lie, etc.). But that doesn't encourage me to give up, it encourages me to make sure there's some sort of alternative. I would admit that I disagree with "henry8's" statement that the information is completely "meaningless" though. I just think it has to be examined highly skeptically and that we shouldn't be too attached to e.g. photos of charred children as a sole means of realising that children (and adults) are burnt in large numbers in wars.