...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

August 06, 2006

Now We Know Why They Doctored The Photo

You may have been following the Reuters doctored photo controversy. If not, Beth has a great rundown.

Of course, my sources here at annika's journal came through for me again. Now we know why Reuters photographer Adnan Hajj felt the need to doctor the original photograph. Open the extended entry to view the original.

Sometimes smoke can form random patterns that are recognizable.


Lots of people have asked why this photographer would risk his career by crudely photoshopping the smoke in this particular picture. It makes sense now don't it?

Update: Now I'm all confused. What if this is the original photo?!

Posted by annika, Aug. 6, 2006 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: annikapunditry


THAT is the 'shop I've been waiting for! (I'm just too lazy to do it myself.)

Posted by: Beth on Aug. 6, 2006

Oh no, it's the poor bear again!

Posted by: Tammy on Aug. 6, 2006

How dare you insult the Prophet of Satan, Muhammad (Pigs Be Upon Him).

Posted by: Marvin on Aug. 6, 2006

This is just for you, Marvin.


Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 6, 2006

This is not the original. The original was a AP photo with very little smoke. You can see it on Little Green Footballs.

Knowing Reuters, it is very possible he had to Photoshop this picture to keep his job

Posted by: Jake on Aug. 6, 2006

I'm sure this sort of stuff doesn't surprise most of the readers here. Typical MSM. Why not doctor photos when you are already doctoring the stories. Big explosions, every possible anecdote about "civilian" casualties, and, of course, Israel's "disproportionate response" is pretty much the guaranteed story line.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 6, 2006

yeah it doesnt. jahway put down baal, same group of folks. Samuel exterpated baal's supportors. Go forward Israel.

Posted by: patrick on Aug. 6, 2006

sorry patrick that was me Jake.

Posted by: jake on Aug. 6, 2006

now cut that out

Posted by: patrick on Aug. 6, 2006

Now, just think of how many shennanigans the MSM indulged in and got away with back in the old days when there was no alternate media?

Posted by: kyle8 on Aug. 7, 2006

Did any of you read that the Clinton News Network (aka CNN) is using imagery created by the Al-Manar network, the network owned and operated by Hezbollah? I'd also like to know if the MSM has has single story on the affect of thousands of Hez rockets (specifcally intended to kill real civilians)on Israel's children. (This comment and question are both derived from a guest post on the HH blog.) How many times will the MSM be fooled by Muslim propoganda? I'm willing to bet you won't see FOX News busting out BS imagery provided by terrorist propoganda machines.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 7, 2006

Just in case you'd like to know, I'll give you my prognostication on the Lamont/Lieberman race. Stick a fork in him, Lieberman is done. Now, can Alan Schlesinger make Ned look like the kook he is?

Posted by: Casca on Aug. 7, 2006

Jeez, Casca, I wish you were right, but Joe will walk away with this race in the General, running as an Independent.

What distresses me is that he'll organize with the D.'s anyway. But no way to elect a R. in Connecticut, the East's answer to San Francisco.

Posted by: shelly on Aug. 7, 2006

great site.. you redneck punks should go to college after you wash up this year...

we should strip you from your citizenships :p

Posted by: sam cassidy on Aug. 10, 2006

lame site. minds like these create wars. you guys are the real terrorists

Posted by: d.banga on Aug. 13, 2006


Posted by: helen on Jul. 9, 2009