Reuters Faked Beirut Photo
After pressure from bloggers who noticed that an image showing Beirut after an airstrike had cloned smoke and other features, Reuters said, “photo editing software was improperly used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this advisory. We are sorry for any inconvience.” Here’s what the image looked like, as published by Reuters:
Smoke billows from burning buildings destroyed during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut’s suburbs August 5, 2006. Many buildings were flattened during the attack. REUTERS/Adnan Hajj
Then, Reuters issued an image kill for the photo:
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.
The new, correct photo, is this one:
ATTENTION EDITORS: THIS IS A CORRECTED FILE OF LBN20. REUTERS HAS ISSUED A KILL OF THE PREVIOUS VERSION. Smoke billows from burning buildings destroyed during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut’s suburbs August 5, 2006. Picture taken August 5, 2006. REUTERS/Adnan Hajj (LEBANON)
You can check out Yahoo for more photos posted by Adnan Hajj yourself; I don’t immediately see any other doctored photos.
This entry was posted on Sunday, August 6th, 2006 at 2:35 pm and is tagged with adnan hajj, smoke billows from, photo editing software, attention editors, correct photo, burning buildings, inconvience, israeli air, smoke billowing from, air raid, airstrike, editorial policy, previous version, beirut, reuters, bloggers, investigations, photograph, photographer, lebanon. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback.
on August 7th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
If one are going to use Photoshop, one should at least become proficiet in it before sending pics out.
I cannot believe any Pro would put such ninsense out, especially as the original pic is perfectly fine.
Surely there must be more to this than meets the eye?
Pete Jenkins
Detail Photography
Nottingham
on August 7th, 2006 at 6:09 pm
“If one are going to use Photoshop” should clearly be “If one is going to use Photoshop”. Singular, not plural. I guess you wouldn’t have gotten it messed up in the first place had you not tried to be pretentious by including “one” without even understanding the context in which it should be used.
PS: Nonsense doesn’t have an ‘i’ in it, and proficient has an ‘n’.
on August 8th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
I agree with Pete that it seems odd to doctor a photo that already adequately illustrates the caption. Then, that the smoke is so poorly and obviously blotted seems like an egregious error for anyone let alone a professional when you consider they must have suspected, if not hoped, that the picture would serve a world wide audience. Sensational or not, it just looks fake. You’ve made a very interesting point, Pete.
While I respect Grammar Nazi’s pertinacity for following up with the lesson I’d also like to suggest that before he/she considers going on another lofty tirade that they understand they’ve proven nothing other than they have the attention span of a gnat and the maturity of a toddler. How apropos that our loquacious executioner have the ego of, well, a Nazi. Despite his errors Pete’s observation was stated clear enough and making light of them simply draws more undue attention to the grammar from the picture and Pete’s provocative commentary.
When a response is made in a forum such as this which offers unique commentary or stimulates debates around an intriguing idea or theorem it should be embraced without fear of near sighted reprisal from the sinister leather tongue of the stereotypical practitioner of grammar. I’m all for effective communication but this is neither the place for a soap box nor the time to step up on it.
on August 8th, 2006 at 5:43 pm
This looks so poorly done - I think Reuters just wanted to get in the news !
on August 9th, 2006 at 6:54 pm
BRILLIANT GRAMMAR,JOHN……..I SUPPORT PETE’S COMMENTS…………THIS IS VERY EMBARRASSING…..REUTERS EDITORS SHOULD BE FIRED NOT JUST THE PHOTOGRAHER………
on August 16th, 2006 at 12:31 am
Seeing is Believing - Unless its a Doctored Photograph of Lebanon Published by Reuters…
Unfortunately, its been revealed that we’ve been had. A noteworthy photo on the Reuters website was doctored by its freelance, Lebanese photographer. …
on October 11th, 2006 at 9:09 pm
[…] Reuters Faked Beirut Photo by Elliott Back […]