Write Lightning is a blog from writer Deb Thompson.
Everyone is welcome here.
(Some links or topics may not be completely kid-appropriate.)
Everyone is welcome here.
(Some links or topics may not be completely kid-appropriate.)
Thu, Oct 27 2005
Covering the Story and Covering Up the Photo?
I missed the USA TODAY photo of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice in which someone had manipulated the photo in a way that made her eyes resemble a promotion for Halloween . The folks at USA TODAY have replaced the offending photo with a more natural-looking shot and have placed a comment above the original article. If you missed the more demonic version you can still have a look over at Michelle Malkin's blog.
I know no details about the process of the photo manipulation or who was responsible for the resulting horrid quality or the motive behind altering or publishing the altered photo, but I thought what happened next was just as interesting. In the midst of criticism, the paper tried to do the right thing by removing the doctored photo, which had by then become somewhat of a story all by itself.
I realize that USA Today might not have wanted to detract from the original news story. It's just ironic to me that in order to openly present the orignal story in an honest fashion the folks at the paper ended up hiding another part of the emerging story by removing the altered photo altogether, instead of reprinting it with some sort of retraction or explanation. It's not a cover-up but it's not exactly full coverage either. Well, it's their paper, of course, and I don't mean to criticize their decision. I just think it creates an interesting ethical dilemna in the world of journalism.
posted at: 10:54 | category: /Writing Life | link to this entry
I missed the USA TODAY photo of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice in which someone had manipulated the photo in a way that made her eyes resemble a promotion for Halloween . The folks at USA TODAY have replaced the offending photo with a more natural-looking shot and have placed a comment above the original article. If you missed the more demonic version you can still have a look over at Michelle Malkin's blog.
I know no details about the process of the photo manipulation or who was responsible for the resulting horrid quality or the motive behind altering or publishing the altered photo, but I thought what happened next was just as interesting. In the midst of criticism, the paper tried to do the right thing by removing the doctored photo, which had by then become somewhat of a story all by itself.
I realize that USA Today might not have wanted to detract from the original news story. It's just ironic to me that in order to openly present the orignal story in an honest fashion the folks at the paper ended up hiding another part of the emerging story by removing the altered photo altogether, instead of reprinting it with some sort of retraction or explanation. It's not a cover-up but it's not exactly full coverage either. Well, it's their paper, of course, and I don't mean to criticize their decision. I just think it creates an interesting ethical dilemna in the world of journalism.
posted at: 10:54 | category: /Writing Life | link to this entry
