Can you tell the rockets from the chaff?

The Reuters news agency has fired one of its Beirut-based photographers and removed all his pictures from their database after he was found to have manipulated two images from the conflict.

In the first image, shown above, Adnan Hajj copied the trails of a single flare to make it look as if an Israeli jet had dropped three pieces of chaff rather than just one. (We've been unable to track down the original image). But Mr Hajj was caught out by conservative bloggers in America on his second manipulation, the darkening of smoke above Beirut after an Israeli airstrike (below, altered image on the left).

"There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image,” Tom Szlukovenyi, global photo editor of Reuters, said in a statement yesterday. A spokeswoman for the news agency added that Mr Hajj denied intentionally changing his pictures but was correcting dust spots and problems with the light.

Neither comment has impressed the blogosphere, which is hailing the discovery of the fakery as a victory for citizen journalists over "the mainstream media" or MSM.

Little Green Footballs, which spotted the alteration of the second picture on Saturday has compared it to "Rathergate", when bloggers toppled Dan Rather, the veteran CBS news anchor, for basing a story on George Bush's Vietnam war service on forged letters.

Try this good index to the weblog "fireswarm", and plenty of conspiracy theories about the MSM's coverage of the Middle East as a whole. For a cooked up Adnan Hajj business card, here.

Other recent faked images from the Middle East include this too-perfect picture from Iraq, which made it on to the front page of The Los Angeles Times in April 2003. A month later, Brian Walski, the photojournalist, discussed why he changed the picture in this interview (apologies for the link): "I wasn't debating the ethics of it when I was doing it. I was looking for a better image."

We asked Paul Sanders, picture editor of The Times, for his reaction to the Reuters controversy and whether the manipulation of images was becoming more and more common:

"The striking thing about the picture that caught him out is such a bad photograph. I see between 6,000 and 8,000 images every day and when you see something that bad, you just skip past it.

"The manipulation is obvious because he's used the cloning tool — which all photographers use these days to remove dust and spots from their pictures — and repeated the patterns in the smoke. He has used such a large radius on the cloning brush that it is unmissable. It's such a strange thing to do because the original, on the right, has a better contrast with the sky.

"Our line at The Times is that photographers are forbidden to do anything that editorially alters the content of the image. Taking things out and putting things in are completely against the rules. Things that are allowed include cropping images and correcting the contrast and colour balance of the picture. Digital chips attract dust, so photographers, especially in Beirut right now, often have to use the cloning tool to remove spots. I think that's what the Reuters photographer was doing when he got carried away.

"The sad thing is that Adnan Hajj is a good photographer. We've used one of his pictures for the front page. But every single Reuters photographer knows that they do not tolerate any manipulation of their work. The fact that Reuters immediately pulled his entire portfolio of 920 pictures show how seriously they are taking this.

"The discussion among photographers right now is how stupid he was. It's just not worth it. Because if you do that, you lose everything, your job, your credibility. All the photographers at The Times know that if they were caught manipulating a picture, they'd be out. It's that straightforward: whether they are staff, contract or freelancer, they would be sacked. If we do something with images — meddle with them, make a montage — we flag it up and make it obvious because the most important thing is that readers trust you; without that, it's a lost cause."

Comments

[BOISHPATSTAUB]

It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://scottstantonnq.easyjournal.com

[Roslyn Pine.]

With regard to misrepresentation by the media,especially, in times of war,the most egregious example of the present conflict must be the so-called massacre
at Quana .Apart from the revised downwards figure from 56 to 28 killed I have not seen any newspaper reports which detail the theatrical setup to dupe a gullible press such as dead bodies transported there to inflate the figures (obvious because no crush injuries consistent with a death caused by falling debris etc).It is a good thing that scrutiny over the internet will make such obvious fraud easier to detect.`

[shane]

"It would be helpful to comment on the potential reason why the photographer changed the photos, ie was he trying to help either one of the sides in the conflict or was he just looking for commercial gain by more dramatic photos"

Phil mate, that's what the whole article was about!?!?! Anyway, I think you can scrap the commercial benefit bit (unles Iran are paying him handsomely). I think the fact he's Lebanese says it all. Reuters employ many, many Arabs, and no Israelis. That's why they're known as Al-Reuters these days. Thry even make the Guardian seem unbiased...

[Dave]

"The sad thing is that Adnan Hajj is a good photographer. We've used one of his pictures for the front page."
Is he really a good photographer or is the Times just covering it’s behind?
A deeper look into Hajj's work is beginning to reveal that at times he scripts his scenes, not unlike professional fascist propagandists. I have seen sequential photos of Hajj's Qana bombing portfolio. When one objectively follows the thread, many pics appear to be set up. Other photographs from the scene show the same "emergency worker" running around the village with the same corpse over quite a long period of time in all sorts of poses clearly demonstrating how the "martyr" is being exploited to sadden and anger the west in particular. This is but one of the many incongruities that are emerging from the Qana photographs.
Propaganda is a very important tool of any guerilla movement involved in asymmetrical warfare. The purpose is obviously to manipulate world public opinion against the enemy and anger it's own camp into a fighting frenzy. Hizbollah is no exception as it keeps all photographers and reporters on a tight leash whenever possible. Therefore, any photos coming out of southern Lebanon are suspect as long as Hizbollah censors are present. And all local photographers are even more suspect as they may have a not so hidden agenda, as we see in the case of Hajj.
One should keep in mind how tight a control Hizbollah has on the comings and goings of outsiders in their state within a state. The most famous Hizbollah "Forbidden City" is Dahiya, where no one comes or goes without escorts and censors. Some journalists occasionally compromise their integrity, selling their souls, as it were, in exchange for gaining exclusive access or a "scoop".

[Sean Birnie]

I'm not really surprised that this article neglects to mention that it was the same Adnan Hajj who took many of the published photos of the Qana "massacre" that were splashed around the world. The blogosphere, particularly LGF, had already raised numerous questions and pointed out anomalies and possible staging regarding Qana. This is what had brought this photographer under such intense scrutiny in the first place.

More of his and Reuters suspicious work is being examined by bloggers, as I write. Lebanon must be experiencing a kind of nightmare Groundog Day where the same people appear in the same reportedly new bomb wreckage, in different poses, on different days. Where a Koran survives a bomb intact but magically catches fire just for the photo-op, on a bit of dry debris. Where the same rescue worker keeps appearing in different places, at different times waving the same dead child. It's more than the fog of war, it's miraculous.

The questions that remain are, how far does the deception reach? Are there other Adnans? To what extent is the Media allowing Hezbollah to run the show for them? And why? I thought you guys at the Times were supposed to be intrepid journo's. Can't you see there could be a much bigger story here?

This isn't just about faking and staging photos though. Words are also being manipulated to create the story. The Israeli atrocity story. The Israel as a rogue state theme. Blood libel. The old meme in a new disguise. And that is much more dangerous.

The the producers of global news inc. need to realise that there is an interactive and potent new source of news and opinion. We are voracious for true news and quick to spot falsehood or hypocracy.

And we are keeping a close and cynical eye on the Old Media.

Little brother is watching you.

[Katherine]

Perhaps the photographer was practising a bit of Al-Taqqiye. If you type it up on Google, you will be enlightened about a great deal more than the possible motive behind this man's propaganda shots. I first alerted the Daily Telegraph to several questionable factors about the photos this same free-lance photographer took for Al-Reuters at Qana; there were legitimate reasons for questioning them which many other bloggers also raised, but the Telegraph's News Editor, Shane Richmond, was insultingly dismissive to all. So, this is not simply a matter of 'one wrong 'un' in the pack, but of a serious and questionable failure of mainstream media, not only not policing itself but even failing to recognise its blatant bias. Many long-time readers await a front-page apology from The Daily Telegraph (now referred to by other bloggers, I see, as 'Daily Hezbollagraph').

[Dr. Louis A. F. Wetzler]

I regret a lot what this Reuter’s photographer did, but this will not change this new tragedy in the Middle East, the almost destruction of Lebanon, which has been rebuilt only in the last years with lots of efforts. This morning papers announced that the total of civilians perished in Lebanon went beyond the thousand. We must ask, what’s more evil war and its victims or the stupidity of a photographer? instead of blaming this guy, what the international community has to do is to encourage all efforts towards peace in the region. Only when Israel and Palestine can live together as sovereign states, and their citizens learn to leave in peace, and get rid of hate, the whole region will change, was Prime Minister Rabin’s dream and what Daniel Baremboim the outstanding musician has been working for years, in spite of criticism of many Israelis. But they are others like the Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace, who stated recently:” We are a national organization of American Jews deeply committed to Israel's well-being through a negotiated settlement to the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The mitzvah guides us, or obligation, to pursue peace and justice, rooted in both secular and religious Jewish traditions. We believe that the vast majority of Israelis and Palestinians long for an enduring peace and that security for Israel can only be achieved through the establishment of an economically and politically viable Palestinian state, necessitating an end to Israel's occupation of land acquired during the 1967 war and an end to Palestinian terrorism”. Polls consistently affirm that the majority of American Jews share these views and many in Israel as well. I hope that this demanding for an urgent peace should be listened everywhere and right now, there is no time to waist any longer.

[Johan Adam Wong]

I hate to say this, but when a photographer who goes by the name of Adnan Hajj alters images he knows only too well not to touch, images that show the destructive power of Israel against an ill-defended Lebanon, I suspect his intent might have been more than a dabbling in sensational journalism.

If the original images had not succeeded in generating hatred towards a bullying Israel unleashing its arsenal of firepower on a helpless, defenceless Lebanon, the retouched images surely must have made the Israelis look more despicable and diabolical.

Conversely, soft sentiments that run the gamut of pity and tears for Lebanon would inevitably rise, and the Hezbollah would be seen as true martyrs sacrificing life and limb against Israeli aggression and for the defence of Lebanon and the people of Palestine.

There is a tumouric logic to Hajj's retouching of those images. The final payoff that makes the logic so palatable is that his brand of objective journalism applies only to the side his heart and soul and religious convictions are with. And this is obviously not the side that makes out his paycheck.

[Clare Rooney]

Does your picture editor Paul Sanders understand the term "useful idiot"? He suggests Hajj "had to use the cloning tool to remove spots. I think that's what the Reuters photographer was doing when he got carried away". How strange then, that the "carrying away" produced a more aggressive picture. How strange too that the dust presumably present on a second image required three rather than one flares to be synthesized (described in the picture caption as "missiles"). Perhaps Sanders also believes that the previous Reuters employee who was for making death threats was also "carried away," and was only testing his keyboard. Still, I suppose a harmless explanation is far less jarring than the admission that the MSM is institutionally prejudiced against Israel, and that anything that supports that bias is therefore given an easy ride.

[Philip Bird]

It would be helpful to comment on the potential reason why the photographer changed the photos, ie was he trying to help either one of the sides in the conflict or was he just looking for commercial gain by more dramatic photos

[Edmond M Mergelsberg]

It is reassuring to read that the photographers working for The Times are not allowed to manipulate images; it would be nice to read a similar comment about the quality of the written news which too often resembles editorials rather that straight reporting of facts.
I still believe that the media is supposed to state facts, not lead ( or mislead ) the public's reactions.