No, they apologized for not following the copyright rules, not for the actual removal of the people.
By photoshopping the 2 women out of the picture, they changed the context of the room, stating that there were no women in the room. Which, regardless of the reasons WHY is a bald-faced lie. A big blue dot over them would have been fine to follow their apparent rules. Photoshopping them out so it appears that they were not there is NOT acceptable from a news organization. Or so it seems to me. On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Michael Dinowitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > If you read the article you'll see that the paper is from a group that does > not print pictures of women. While editing the photo was not right it was > not part of a sinister cover-up. And they owned up to it and apologized. > Basically a slow news day non-story. > > This is, of course, besides the fact that the photo is far from iconic. So > Clinton gasped when the operation was going down. So Obama was leaning in > watching. It's iconic because we're told it is, not because it actually > caries any weight. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:337584 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
