Is this messed up or what? Reuters altering photos from Beirut?

I thought this was really really lame.

I only saw a thumbnail of the image and I could easily tell it was photoshopped.

 

people tend to do stuff like this in wars its called psyops isn't it

 

the media should be engaging in this?

 

I didn't see you outraged when it was discovered the Bush Admin has spent will over $1 billion of our tax dollars on fake news and propaganda.

 

I did not realize that bush was part of the media (aka reuters, AP, etc). The media is supposed to paint a neutral picture, not promote one side or the other.

But, it is a nice try to change the topic.

 

If they're supposed to be neutral, why then is the Bush Admin spending over $1 billion of our tax dollars on fakes news stories and propaganda, right in the the US, and in Iraq?

 

Did bush somehow buy AP and Reuters while I had my eyes closed? Again, please try to keep on topic, at least - if you don't have a good point to make.

 

Worst excuse of the millenium alert:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L06301298.htm

 

It may be the worse excuse of the millenium, but I see that our gullible leftist contingent is willing to buy it. Suckers!

 

Wait, we have stuipd people in the world, they will believe it ...

 

if the guy was fired as soon as it was pointed out, why are you blaming the "media", they just got fooled

was the "media" purposely publishing fake photos?

 

Apparently not. But Bush was purposely buying fake news here and in Iraq with our tax dollars. No outrage from the conservatives then. Only when a photo is faked, of a blown up beruit, which is actually blown up. Oh the outrage!

 

ferret, let's follow the logic of your last two posts and see where it leads us.

In this post, you categorize the actions of Reuters as "psyops." I agree. However, where this logically leads us is the conclusion that the perpetrator was intentionally altering news items with the intention of swaying public opinion towards Hezbollah. i.e. that the perpetrator was on the side of global Islamofascist terrorism... i.e. the other team.

That's what we have been saying all along.

In this post, you propose a rule of ethical behavior which states that you can do anything you want until you get caught, and then as soon as you get caught you can simply apologize and be forgiven.

Hold on a moment while I go rob my local liquor store and murder some of my more annoying neighbors. As soon as I'm caught, I'll just apologize and I'll be back on DP in a jiffy. 'K?

No, it's not OK ferret. Actions have consequences, and one of the consequences of repeated anti-American activities by the mainstream media is that no one with any degree of common sense is willing to take their propaganda at face value anymore.

 

So, logically speaking, was the Bush Admin intentionally creating news items with the intention of swaying public opinion towards their corrupt actions?

So when will we ever see Bush face the consequences of his treason and murder?

I just don't get it. They show a photo of beruit with blown up buildings and smoke. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.. wether the photo was real or not, beruit does in fact have blown up buildings and I'm quite sure there was smoke!

Oh the outrage! The biased liberal media has warped all our minds!

 

If someone tricks a news service into publishing a BS photo, then the only thing the news service has done wrong is not screen the photo properly

Do you think the people at reuters are sitting around saying "lets pulish some BS photos that will help out image and our business"?

umm, no actually I categorize the actions of whoever slipped in the photos as "psyops", I categorize reuters as being sloppy and letting someone trick them.

Is there some proof that Reuters was pusposely trying to run propaganda?

Are you trying to say people using psyops in a war is somehow morally wrong?

Because we use alot of psyops in our wars.

 

Don't get em started on molten steel

 

That's good to know, since he was one of the main photographers at the staged photo op in Qana.

Pretend it was Bush. You'll see it

We're talking about doctored photos to give a worse impression than what was. There is no moral equivalence here. And to be honest, there is no defense or excuse for it. God only knows why you are trying to find an excuse.

 

So what is Bush's excuse? Why are you always making them for him?

 

This isn't about Bush or blame America first. You'll have to quench your hatred in another thread

 

I'm just asking why you're outraged over a photo of beruit being blown up, when beruit actually is being blown up, but not outraged over the $1 billion in tax payer dollars bush has spent on fake news here and abroad.