Once they were caught (by the New York Times), they didn't even make any excuses. Here's the story.Worse things have happened, of course, but the willingness to change a picture like this is a bit worrying.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Photoshop at The Economist
The Economist, most respectable weekly magazine in the world, photoshopped a picture of Obama on it's front cover last month.
Once they were caught (by the New York Times), they didn't even make any excuses. Here's the story.
Worse things have happened, of course, but the willingness to change a picture like this is a bit worrying.
Once they were caught (by the New York Times), they didn't even make any excuses. Here's the story.Worse things have happened, of course, but the willingness to change a picture like this is a bit worrying.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
it's a pity or worse the NYT doesn't care to mention the recent flotilla related photo-shopping/editing at Reuters. Elder of Ziyon has details.
I guess the reason for the Economist doing it, that it is much cheaper/more "economic" to have an artist photo-shop a piece into something aspiring to become iconic than pay for the real thing, so from a "socialist" perspective it is an attempt of cheating the labourer (photographer) out of his/her just pay. (I assume that non-icon inspiring photos come a lot cheaper than true strikes of genius)
(they do it all the time, the NewYorker had a series of photo-portraits of this wannabe star-artist whose name I forget and lumped up in their teaser Netanyahu with the two most unsavoury others, I forgot the third but the second was friend Ahmadinejad.) They are willing to do anything that sells, anything! all of them! all the time!
Silke
Well, at least they didn't make it look as if he was shooting a little boy hiding behind his father...
This is the kind of inverted ethics we see today in the media professionals. Now they are using soviet propaganda techniques. Decadence galore.
Post a Comment