Newsmax gains credibility in the MSM

[fossten]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Friday, Aug. 4, 2006 10:50 a.m. EDT

The New Yorker: NewsMax Is ‘Influential’


It’s not every day that NewsMax is mentioned twice in two separate articles in The New Yorker magazine, that bastion of the liberal media.

NewsMax.com must be hitting a nerve — a big one — if the August 7 edition of The New Yorker is any indication.

In an article ("Amateur Hour”) about the rise of citizen journalists and Internet journalism, Nicholas Lemann — dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University — writes that the new media has broken "the long-standing choke hold on public information and discussion that the traditional media — usually known, when this argument is made, as ‘gatekeepers’ or ‘the priesthood’— have supposedly been able to maintain up to now.”

According to Lemann and The New Yorker, NewsMax is one of the most powerful and notable of the new media.

Lemann notes: "Internet journalism is a huge tent that encompasses sites from traditional news organizations; Web-only magazines like Slate and Salon, sites like Daily Kos and NewsMax, which use some notional connection to the news to function as influential political actors . . .”

Not content to simply call NewsMax "influential,” The New Yorker also criticizes NewsMax in another article for committing a most unusual "crime.” What crime?

The New Yorker "Talk of the Town” column, by Hendrik Hertzberg, claims that NewsMax uses the word "Democrat” instead of "Democratic” when referring to the party of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry.

As we explained to a New Yorker editor, as a matter of fact we regularly refer to the donkey party as "Democratic” — though, on occasion and rarely, copy editors may have used the colloquial "Democrat.” [Even the maverick Senator from Arizona, John McCain, appearing on Fox News Thursday night, referred to the "Democrat Party.”]

The New Yorker’s angst was recently piqued by a recent mass e-mail sent out under the name of President Bush that refers to the "Democrat” party. The term, the magazine admits, dates back to the Harding administration.

"The Democrat Party has a clear record when it comes to taxes,” the Bush e-mail stated, adding: "The difference is clear: If you want the government in your pocket, vote Democrat.”

In a speech a few weeks earlier, Bush said: "It’s time for the leadership in the Democrat Party to start laying out ideas.”

Apparently, the New Yorker sees a grand conspiracy in the use of "Democrat” which the magazine describes as a "slur.”

If that has you scratching your head, Hertzberg claims "Democrat” is a slur because it gives greater prominence to the syllable "rat” as in Democrat. As he puts it, Democrat is just "handy way to express contempt . . . ‘Democrat Party’ is jarring verging on ugly. It fairly screams ‘rat.’”

We never thought of that. Perhaps there is a deep-seated complex at work at the remnant of the old media who see a conspiracy behind every corner as their viewerships, readerships and audiences disappear to new media like NewsMax. We are, after all, "influential.”

 

[97silverlsc]

Having it said that a source is "influential" does not buy credibility, it just shows that there are gullible people such as yourself that are influenced by the trash they spew!!!

 

[stang99x]

Um, what it means is that The New Yorker has realized that newsmax reports faster and accurately and that they realize they are going to lose readers to it, probably of the democrat demeanor.

 

[fossten]

Having it said that a source is "influential" does not buy credibility, it just shows that there are gullible people such as yourself that are influenced by the trash they spew!!!

Yeah right. But you trust sources like Reuters, which has yet again been PROVEN to be faking photography and news:


Blog Consensus: Reuters Photographer Photoshopped Beirut "Burning

Buildings" Photo (UPDATED: Reuters Admits)
Posted by Tom Blumer on August 6, 2006 - 02:09.
UPDATE: As commenter "Sua Sponte 75" noted, Reuters has issued a "Picture Kill Advisory" (link is to Michelle Malkin, as original PKA appears to have been moved) and has admitted altering the photo. Drudge is currently linking to the story at the very top of his page. To the extent that an organization like Reuters cares about such things, it appears that it has been humiliated.

Commenter "Ten7s" asks a reasonable question -- "Makes me wonder how much deft photo manipulation gets printed in the media." Indeed.
_________________________________

Every once in a while you want to tell yourself that media bias is accidental and not deliberate, a sort of "they can't help themselves" phenomenon.

This is NOT one of those times.

Here is a photo published by Reuters that is captioned, "Smoke billows from burning buildings destroyed during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs August 5, 2006. Many buildings were flattened during the attack. (Adnan Hajj/Reuters)":



Numerous bloggers and others have pointed out that the image has been heavily photoshopped. Some of them include:

- Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs, who appears to have been the first to report it
- Michelle Malkin
- The Jawa Report
- AllahPundit at Hot Air
- The Shape of Days
- Rob at Left & Right

Among the important points being made:

The photoshopping includes copying and pasting smoke to make it seem as if there is more of it, and the copying of other images to make the picture appear to have more destruction taking place.
The "photojournalist" is the one and only Adnan Hajj, who was accused of taking shots of the same corpse of a child with different people carrying it last week after the Qana bombing and building collapse.
The photo was put forth for opinion as to its legitimacy at Sportsshooter.com, and the verdict is not only that it's a fake, but an embarrassingly incompetent one at that. One commenter said, "If your (sic) going to ruined (sic) your career, at least work on the photo a little longer than two minutes."
Several bloggers are questioning the legitimacy of some of previous Hajj photos.
The incident may mark a new low in photographic news-twisting to make a political point.

This post only scratches the surface of what is being discovered, and of what will continue to develop. Go to the blogs cited for more details.

http://newsbusters.org/node/6783

Talk about spewing trash and hate.

Not even a nice try, Phil.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reuters admits altering Beirut photo

Reuters withdraws photograph of Beirut after Air Force attack after US blogs, photographers point out 'blatant evidence of manipulation.'

Reuters' head of PR says in response, 'Reuters has suspended photographer until investigations are completed into changes made to photograph.'

Photographer who sent altered image is same Reuters photographer behind many of images from Qana, which have also been subject of suspicions for being staged

Yaakov Lappin

A Reuters photograph of smoke rising from buildings in Beirut has been withdrawn after coming under attack by American web logs. The blogs accused Reuters of distorting the photograph to include more smoke and damage.

The photograph showed two very heavy plumes of black smoke billowing from buildings in Beirut after an Air Force attack on the Lebanese capital. Reuters has since withdrawn the photograph from its website, along a message admitting that the image was distorted, and an apology to editors.

Reuters withdraws doctored image

In the message, Reuters said that "photo editing software was improperly used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this advisory. We are sorry for any inconvience."

Reuters' head of PR Moira Whittle said in response: "Reuters has suspended a photographer until investigations are completed into changes made to a photograph showing smoke billowing from buildings following an air strike on Beirut. Reuters takes such matters extremely seriously as it is strictly against company editorial policy to alter pictures."

"As soon as the allegation came to light, the photograph, filed on Saturday 5 August, was removed from the file and a replacement, showing the same scene, was sent. The explanation for the removal was the improper use of photo-editing software," she added.

Earlier, Charles Johnson, of the Little Green Footballs blog , which has exposed a previous attempt at fraud by a major American news corporation, wrote : "This Reuters photograph shows blatant evidence of manipulation. Notice the repeating patterns in the smoke; this is almost certainly caused by using the Photoshop “clone” tool to add more smoke to the image."

Johnson added: "Smoke simply does not contain repeating symmetrical patterns like this, and you can see the repetition in both plumes of smoke. There’s really no question about it."

Speaking to Ynetnews, Johnson said: "This has to cast doubt not only on the photographer who did the alterations, but on Reuters' entire review process. If they could let such an obvious fake get through to publication, how many more faked or 'enhanced' photos have not been caught?"

A series of close ups are then posted on the blog, showing that "it’s not only the plumes of smoke that were 'enhanced.' There are also cloned buildings." The close ups do appear to show exact replicas of buildings appearing next to one another in the photograph.

The Sports Shooter web forum , used by professional photographers, also examined the photo, with many users concluding that the image has been doctored.

'Looks so obviously doctored'

"I'll second the cloned smoke...but it looks so obvious that I don't know how the photographer could have gotten away with it," wrote one user.

After further research, Johnson posted a photograph he says is the original image taken before distortions were made, showing much lighter smoke rising.

Other blogs have also analyzed the photographs, and reached similar conclusions, such as Left & Right , which states: "The photo has been doctored, quite badly."

The author of the Ace of Spades blog wrote: "Even I can see the very suspicious "clonings" of picture elements here. And I'm an idiot."

The Hot Air blog also looked at the photo, describing the image as "the worst Photoshop I have ever seen."

Adnan Hajj, the photographer who sent the altered image, was also the Reuters photographer behind many of the images from Qana – which have also been the subject of suspicions for being staged.

"A photographer who would blatantly falsify an entire 'news' image would certainly not be above posing and staging photographs of rescue workers," Johnson concluded.