Webloggin » Reuters, Photoshop and an Emerging Picture of Bias

Update: Still No Coverage of this Story in the MSM. Michelle Malkin has the Story : Reuters: The clone stamp news service

A recurring theme of my writing here at Webloggin has been the discussion of my perception of bias as demonstrated by those that represent the mainstream media.

I believe that the most recent focus of such bias can be found in the manner in which the MSM and world media outlets have been characterizing the plight of Israel and her efforts to eliminate the threat posed from an internationally armed Hezbollah.

The group think mentality that I have seen emerge is based on pre-conceived notions of Israeli aggression at the behest and with the blessing of the United States. Thus by extension, Israel is the callous overreacting bully, the United States is the catalyst and Hezbollah is the David to the Israeli/US Goliath.

This was apparently the case with the story of the Qana air strike. The media immediately went into overdrive in its coverage and the results of such coverage were easily recognizable. International outrage, spurred on by countless images of dead children as presented by Reuters and the AP, was fast and unanimous.

Unfortunately the story about Qana became the story about how the MSM rallied around the obviously staged photos that showed an odd man in a green helmet in various setting holding the bodies of dead children; many of them the same child in different places.

Wikipedia has no fewer than five pages on the Qana event, one for the airstrike and its aftermath, one page for international outrage, one page discussing the potential removal of the International outrage page, one page on the topic of Qana airstrike conspiracy theories and one page on the discussion of the Qana airstrike conspiracy theories.

It is the last two Wikipedia entries that are of contextual note. As is the case with the MSM coverage of the event, the Wikipedia admins added a flag to the conspiracy theory page indicating that “The neutrality of this article is disputed. To meet Wikipedia’s quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup.”

This is an interesting note in light of the most recent revelation that an Arab photographer who photographed the carnage in the aftermath of the Qana airstrike is the same photographer who was caught providing Reuters with doctored photos from another Israeli airstrike.

This revelation prompted Reuters to release the following statement as noted by Thomas Lifson in the American Thinker.

Hajj worked for Reuters as a non-staff freelance, or contributing photographer, from 1993 until 2003 and again since April 2005.

He was among several photographers from the main international news agencies whose images of a dead child being held up by a rescuer in the village of Qana, south Lebanon, after an Israeli air strike on July 30 have been challenged by blogs critical of the mainstream media’s coverage of the Middle East conflict.

Reuters and other news organisations reviewed those images and have all rejected allegations that the photographs were staged. [emphasis added]

Apparently photographer Adnan Hajj is the gift that keeps on giving and Reuters with all of its editorial oversight seemed fit to frame stories around those crudely doctored images.

Reuters has since admitted that the photo was a hoax even though they originally tried to unsuccessfully circle the wagons in his defense.

The Jawa report has found yet another example of Arab photographer Hajj getting his hand stuck on the Photoshop clone tool.

All in all I have many doubts about the media and this furthers my skepticism. The MSM doesn’t have to actively write about an event to provide a rallying cry. They need only ignore the story in the hopes that the original message will continue to be the one that is perpetuated.

Many people, particularly bloggers and authors on the right have been questioning the objectivity of the mainstream media. They pose some serious questions as to the authenticity of many elements surrounding the press coverage of the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict. At the very least we must ask ourselves if the press is living up to its professional duty to present the news in an unbiased and objective manner.

Others bloggin on this story: