This is good. Some guy has created a program that lets you put
whatever text you want on the sign held by those
kids posing in the desert with an American soldier.
Also, Salon.com recently had an
article about this picture, although I didn't think it was a particularly well researched article. The author tried to argue that the new ease with which images can be manipulated somehow poses a dangerous threat. It contains statements such as:
There was a time when photographs were synonymous with truth -- when you could be sure that what you saw in a picture actually occurred.
Oh, really? What period in history was that?
Images have always been manipulated, and people have always known it can be done.
Then he warns that a doctored photo might be used for political dirty tricks, going on to state:
If a doctored photo ever does lead to the defeat of a political candidate or some other disaster -- puts the wrong guy in jail, say -- one immediate consequence might be a quick decline in the trust we have in pictures.
Reading this, I can only assume he doesn't know anything about the history of photography. What about
the Tydings Affair, when Senator Tydings lost his 1950 Senate reelection bid because of a doctored photo? And William Randolph Hearst, of course, was notorious for using fake (or misleading) pictures in his newspapers for political purposes.
Comments
You'd think that a journalist would do a little more research...I mean really...does this person really believe in jackalopes?
As the person posting that picture even says, the lighting is horrible and stuff.
The article in question just talks about the fact that nowadays that picture in the tydings affairs could be made even MORE realistic looking, and i dont think you would disagree.
It's not a hoax. I'm an aviator, officer, no kiddin.
Surprised me.
They are not rabid, just horney as hell.
This one, logs onto 411 sites when I'm gone flying.
Posted b
I agree.
Thanks for this viewpoint, something that I might not have considered.