I would have to agree with Michael's statement here in the first paragraph...we were discussions Israeli manipulations of media material, so it would only be fair to bring up any potential manipulation by other sources.
I didn't think it totally comes off as you defending Israel, though I suspect that would be your motivation for doing so and I think others would think that as well regardless of what thread you posted it in. Other than you saying that Israel was stupid for not being 1000% above the board and a few other related comments, you have been 99% in defense of Israel, so that would go kind of hands in hand...especially when you go on to read the rest of your comments. I do think that the comparison of doctored video and audio as compared to a cropped photo is a bit overblown. My assumption would be that the focus of this was the injured soldier more than the crowd around him. That is just an assumption and not based on any facts. Cropping photos is hardly uncommon...maybe they determined the larger picture in reduced size wasn't detailed enough so they cropped it so they could make the picture of the injured soldier more prominent? -----Original Message----- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 8:42 AM To: cf-community Subject: Re: Did Reuters Crop a Photo to Remove a Peace Activist's Weapon? > I tend to think the whole point of this thread is pretty disingenuous. Are > you trying to defend Israel's actions, Nope. This comes from another thread about how Israel manipulated a media file and then had to cop to it. The editing of pictures, audio, and video has gone to an extreme where what is 'true' and what is make believe can only be exposed by experts. This thread was just reporting a writeup about how Reuters did some manipulations. There was nothing here about defending Israel. > discredit Reuters or They do a good job of it themselves. >discredit the flotilla passengers? The post was about the cropping of a photo by a major media outlet, not if the flotilla members had weapons or not. The thread may have moved to what type of knife it was but the point was the manipulation. > To me it seems a bit like you're trying to say > "see, they had weapons AND Reuters cropped a photo so the attack was > justified and editing audio is ok since they did it too." Hm. This says to me that I should have included this in my response to Gel in the other thread. The problem is, if I posted it there then it would come off as defending Israel and when it comes to this topic, defending them is the last thing I'd be doing. There is something about the manipulation of photos and other media that I really don't like. > Reuters is not affiliated with the flotilla activists so the comparison > seems a little misaligned. Further, so what if a flotilla passenger has a > knife? They were on their own ship in international waters. Having what > looks to be between a 4 and 6 inch bladed knife isn't an offense is it? It > does nothing to justify either Israel's attack or manipulation of the audio. The only comparison is between Reuters, who manipulated the photo and the Associated Press, who showed the unedited photo. > Smokescreeeeeeeeeeeeen Nope. The post was about Reuters and their manipulation of a photo. The flotilla was just where the photo was from. I didn't say anything about them till later in the thread. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:320463 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
