« The only dead Muslim is a good Muslim | Main | Headline Of The Day - Liberal Fantasy Edition »

The Better To See You With...

From The Pen catches USA Today photo editors "improving" a Condoleezza Rice photo last week.

condi_rice_ap.jpgcondi_rice_usat.JPG
AP                                USA Today


Via Michelle Malkin

Update: I forgot to point out that From The Pen's assertion that you had to go to overseas sources for the unaltered picture isn't correct, as indicated in the AP photo and story linked above.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Better To See You With...:

» Conservative Outpost linked with Those eyes

» The Noonz Wire linked with USA Today Keeps An Eye On Condi

» Bryan's Basement linked with Don't fire til ya see the whites of her eyes!

» T. Longren linked with USA Today Wordplay

» Uncle Sam's Cabin linked with Jaffa kree!

Comments (35)

What, no fangs?... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

What, no fangs?

Reminds me of the alien fro... (Below threshold)

Reminds me of the alien from "Stargate".

There can be only ONE Ra!!

It's a good thing they have... (Below threshold)
Robin Goodfellow:

It's a good thing they have those, like, 20 or 30 levels of professional editors to prevent them from making stupid blunders like this one.

Of course this type of phot... (Below threshold)

Of course this type of photoshopping is commonplace, as we discussed over Bush's memo about the bathroom break. They were simply making the picture clearer so that their readers could discern exactly how EVIL she really is...

Honestly, I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the same fallout as when the infamous "O.J." photo ran on the magazine cover.

I'm not sure whether to call it stupid or sickening.

Shooting Coulter with a "fi... (Below threshold)
robert:

Shooting Coulter with a "fish eye" lens is one thing, but this is a new level.

For some reason, this reminds me of the "halo effect" Time gave Anita Hill some years back.

It is a sad state of affairs when truth and honesty no longer matter to a "news" organization

The real question is why AP... (Below threshold)
Bart:

The real question is why AP did not use the retouch photo?

I defended the "potty break... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:

I defended the "potty break" photo as not breaking the ethical bounds of photojournalism... however, this one is clearly over the line. It crosses the rule of "Could someone standing next to the photographer have witnessed what the image shows?"

The manipulation appears to be the sole work of someone at USA Today. None of the AP published versions of the image shows the "Damien" eyes.

Jaffa, kree!Condi ... (Below threshold)
Adam:

Jaffa, kree!

Condi go'auld?

Interesting...she goes from... (Below threshold)

Interesting...she goes from 'concentrating and focused' to 'evil' in one easy step.

I used to work in photo ret... (Below threshold)
Don Myers:

I used to work in photo retouching and can tell y'all two things about this photo:

1) Widening and brightening the eyes is standard procedure for photo that will appear ON NEWSPRINT. (It may surprise you, but some people haven’t shoved their heads up the blogosphere’s ass and will purchase and read newspapers that are actually printed on cheap, pulpy, crappy paper). Trust me, ON NEWSPRINT, the photo isn’t nearly as jarring.

2) It’s not a very good job. My guess is that the retoucher either had too much coffee or is new at the job.

I realize that you have a pathological need to believe that the corporate-owned media is really a anarcho-socialist cabal dedicated to stealing their guns and making Republicans look bad. It’s like Catholics believing the host isn’t the Body of Christ—it’s a matter of faith, not brains.

Malkin says it, you believe it, and that ends it for these folks

I never ever believe memos ... (Below threshold)
jc:

I never ever believe memos or photographs from the liberal media anymore. Just wait until Zell Miller starts disappearing from file photos the way Stalin did to his political enemies.

Furthermore, the reason the... (Below threshold)
jc:

Furthermore, the reason they got caught at this is because it is such a bad Photoshop job. Similar to typing a memo in MS Word or releasing a pdf of the original with spelling errors corrected which had been marked with [sic] in the original report (remember ABC's "republican" memo on how to exploit the Schiavo case?). I wonder how much of this sort of thing goes on that we don't catch.

Yes Don Meyers you are so r... (Below threshold)

Yes Don Meyers you are so right about that, the media never MAKES UP STORIES or anything like that, to try and make Republicans look bad and influence a presidential election for example.

Malkin has a helluva lot better record than your precious MSM.

One of papers I worked for ... (Below threshold)
Corky Boyd:

One of papers I worked for had a prohibition against retouching faces used in news photos. This was in the days of B&W non-digital photography. The photographer could adjust contrast, use soft focus, vignette the heads. But there could be no airbrushing or alteration of what the camera caught.

As a joke, when Elvis was about to enter the service, one of the airbrush artists redid him in a military crewcut and passed the doctored photo around the paper. He caught hell. That's how strict they were.

I'm showing my age here, though this happened when I was still in school.

I would like to know what USA Today's policy is on news photo alterations.

As much as I know these fol... (Below threshold)

As much as I know these folks have their biases deep in their bones (I used to work for IT at a J-school), to a Photoshop eyes this looks like a case of "editors with too much to do" + "automated pipeline/lazy dumb person with sharpen filter".

I've done an example at:
http://steelcitycowboy.harkyman.com/2005/10/usa-today-uses-sharpen-filter.html

I just checked the USA Toda... (Below threshold)

I just checked the USA Today website, and it appears as though they've removed the doctored photo. But thanks to the wonders of modern technology, I was able to grab a screenshot of their website earlier today and archive it here.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE... (Below threshold)
oliver bush:

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FUSS IS ALL ABOUT. I'D STILL HIT IT.

Still not as scary as Hilla... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Still not as scary as Hillary's calves. *shudder*

Let's get this straight - t... (Below threshold)
JAT0:

Let's get this straight - this photo was retouched and intended to be used electronically, not "only" for print. MSM leans so far to the left that not one day goes by without them showing bias. I believe that they are not even trying to hid it anymore.

The effect of this photo is done at first publication - no chatter in the world from blogs will reverse that effect. Hell the majority of the people that saw this don't read blogs!

Remember a picture is worth a 1000 words! MSM knows exactally what they are doing by retouching photos. Condi = devil; Hillary = St. Hillary

Challenge - anyone want to ... (Below threshold)
JAT0:

Challenge - anyone want to publish retouched photos like this one of:
1. Hillary
2. Dean
3. St. Bill
4. Joe Wilson

Come on, let's see of photoshoping of lefties!

Malkin has a helluva lot... (Below threshold)
Don Myers:

Malkin has a helluva lot better record than your precious MSM.

Ken, if you truly believe that then you are are True Believer in the Power and Glory of the Divinely-Annointed Boy-King in Washington and nothing I say will shake the foundations of your faith.

BTW, "MSM" is another word for "multi-billion dollar corporation." Multi-billion dollar corporations are not liberal socialists. They're greedy capitalists, just like the Bush regime. That's why they usually make the Bush regime look BETTER than they are, not WORSE.

Multi-billion dollar corporations handle Dubya with kid gloves---and he STILL looks like a lying asshole on teevee. Can you imagine how much worse he must appear in real ife?

BTW, Gannett owns 100 daily... (Below threshold)
Don Myers:

BTW, Gannett owns 100 daily newspapers in this country in addition to USAToday. They also publish the Army Times, Navy Times, Navy Times Marine Corps, Air Force Times, Federal Times, Defense Times, and Military Market. They also produce a wide variety of propaganda pieces with defense contractor General Electric (owners of NBC).

You still think they have a liberal bias?

JAT0: Photo processing erro... (Below threshold)

JAT0: Photo processing errors like this most likely happen all the time (I know they do at my business!). The problem is that the editors are in love with people like Hillary(!), and when this happens to their favorite folks like her, they notice and have it fixed. Everyone else has got to watch out for themselves. So it's not that they do it on purpose to people like our Condi, but that they make an extra-special effort to make sure their favorites always look great.

Don Myers: While the people who write the checks are undoubtedly capitalists, the people who write the stories, take the photos and edit them are for the most part leftists. That's just a fact, man.

Don Myers,Go back ... (Below threshold)
robert:

Don Myers,

Go back under your rock.

Don's unable to comprehend ... (Below threshold)
ICallMasICM:

Don's unable to comprehend the intracies of business and economics. He can't process that there's a different editorial staff and operation at USA Today that Army Times and they can still amazingly be owned by one chain.

Watch out for her terrible ... (Below threshold)

Watch out for her terrible "nucular" laser beam eyesight...

AIEEYAH!!!!!!

Roland:While th... (Below threshold)
Don Myers:

Roland:

While the people who write the checks are undoubtedly capitalists, the people who write the stories, take the photos and edit them are for the most part leftists. That's just a fact, man.

According to you, the cats who write the paychecks have no control over editorial content. I find that impossible to believe.

Bob:

I love you too, Schmoopie. Give us a kiss...

Oh yes Don, it is impossibl... (Below threshold)

Oh yes Don, it is impossible for gazillionaires to hate Bush (George Soros, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy).

And yes the press handles Bush with kid gloves, you are so right about that too - like the Koran flushing story, which simply could not have happened and which is completely discredited. Like umpteen straight days of Abu Ghraib coverage on the front page of the NY Times. Like refusing to cover the Swift Boat Veterans. Like giving tons of coverage to complete non-stories like the Downing Street Memo, while not covering terrible real stories like Able Danger.

Don, there are so many thousands of counter examples to what you are claiming, you should just quit now before you get further behind. You are starting to sound like a clueless Moonbat.

You don't want that, do you?

Roland - this was not a pho... (Below threshold)
JAT0:

Roland - this was not a photoshop error. Come on, it was done on purpose!

Don,It was, of cou... (Below threshold)
robert:

Don,

It was, of course, unnecessary and extravagant of you to out yourself in this thread.

And while I cannot reciprocate your feelings in this way, to show my good intentions I’ve looked up the American Medical Association (ama-assn.org), which, with some work, may help to locate someone who makes rock calls.

Best of luck regaining your mind.

Ken:Obviously you'... (Below threshold)
Don Myers:

Ken:

Obviously you're part of the "Malkin says it, I believe it, and that ends it" brigade, so I have no illusions of weakening your faith.

But here in the reality-based community, this is complete bullshit:

And yes the press handles Bush with kid gloves, you are so right about that too - like the Koran flushing story, which simply could not have happened and which is completely discredited. Like umpteen straight days of Abu Ghraib coverage on the front page of the NY Times. Like refusing to cover the Swift Boat Veterans. Like giving tons of coverage to complete non-stories like the Downing Street Memo, while not covering terrible real stories like Able Danger.

You fail to understand that Able Danger and the Swift Boat Liars were fabrications by the GOP smearmongers, while Abu Ghraib and the Downing Street Memos actually exist.

Perhaps Rob Coudry was correct when he said this on the Daily Show:

"The truth itself has an inherent anti-Bush bias."

Look's like it wasn't the a... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:

Look's like it wasn't the a general application of an unsharp mask after all. USA Today has replaced the "enhanced" image with an image that meets their ethical standards. They've also added this editor's comment about the switch:

"Editor's note: The photo of Condoleezza Rice that originally accompanied this story was altered in a manner that did not meet USA TODAY's editorial standards. The photo has been replaced by a properly adjusted copy. Photos published online are routinely cropped for size and adjusted for brightness and sharpness to optimize their appearance. In this case, after sharpening the photo for clarity, the editor brightened a portion of Rice's face, giving her eyes an unnatural appearance. This resulted in a distortion of the original not in keeping with our editorial standards."

Don, USA Today admits it pu... (Below threshold)
JAT0:

Don, USA Today admits it published an altered photo. End of conversation.

The only liar in the whole ... (Below threshold)

The only liar in the whole Swift Boat story was John Kerry - who lied about going to Cambodia.

Abu Ghraib is real alright - but sorry, putting panties on some guys head is not 'torture' no matter how hard you moonbats scream about it.

The Downing Street Memo is *yawn* real too, but so what? Sorry, you are not a member of the 'reality-based' community if you think it amounts to anything.

Able Danger is a 'fabrication'? That would come as a shock to all the personnel from the Pentagon who worked on Able Danger who are willing to go on the record and say they found Atta's ring before the 911 attacks.

Oh, but I forgot you are a good leftist who naturally presumes everyone in the Pentagon is a lying smearmonger.

Again, hardly a 'reality-based' conclusion, and I do so wish you would stop pretending you have any connection with reality - it is fairly obvious you have constructed your own alternate universe in which the press always gives Bush a pass, and in which an obvious media bias staring you in the face like Condi's demon eyes goes unnoticed by you. Just because you choose not to see it does not mean it does not exist.

Ken:I never cease ... (Below threshold)
Don Myers:

Ken:

I never cease to be amazed at how y'all just create your own reality by simply making shit up. It's amazing!




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy