5 ms·

Fox News runs digitally altered images in coverage of Seattle’s protests, CHAZ

99 points by erentz 6y ago

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
CivBase 6y ago
I dislike Fox News. They are clearly using these pictures to push a narrative and they absolutely need to be more clear about where and when the pictures came from. However... that first picture was very obviously a collage, complete with inconsistent lighting and a gradient fade. You'd have to believe in ghosts to think that was an undoctored photo.
- rbanffy 6y ago
  I wouldn't say believing in ghosts is beyond Fox News's audience. The other day, iirc, they even had to warm people against injecting bleach.
  - CivBase 6y ago
    Something tells me "phantom protesters" was not the angle they were going for.
    - rbanffy 6y ago
      The only reason they don't go for it is because they don't find it useful.
- nkozyra 6y ago
  Journalistic standards would dictate that it be clearly labeled photo illustration, in that case.
  - CivBase 6y ago
    I 100% agree. But isn't a competing news outlet writing an article about a missing label just a bit on-the-nose? Particularly when considering the photo in question.
    - orwin 6y ago
      I think the fact that it happened 3 time to describe one event warrant a pat on the head and a "we got you" article.
    - nkozyra 6y ago
      I don't follow the "on-the-nose" comment in this context. In theory, the media serves as the public watchdog for government. If media violates the ethical standards they should be called out. The truth is television media has always had low standards for these rules versus print media. That it transfers to their digital properties is no surprise.
      - fredsanford 6y ago
        Television is called a medium because it is neither rare nor well done. Ernie Kovacs sometime in the '60s
- Terretta 6y ago
  > You’d have to believe in ghosts... Looked at supermarket checkout tabloid covers lately? https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/styles/scale_w1024/s3/static/D8Image/2020/03/15/nationalenquirer-coronaviruscover.jpg https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/styles/scale_w1024/s3/st... The believability bar may be lower than you’d hope.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  I think the first photo was posted as a collage, and the issue with it is more that the photos come from May 30th. The gun carrier's second photo is where the alter is important.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
  If you scroll further in the article, the second image, showing a man in front of the CHAZ sign, is not clearly an edit.
- pera 6y ago
  It may be obvious if you are watching the full size version on a desktop/laptop screen, but it is not that obvious when you are scrolling through a bunch of thumbnails on your phone and specially if your vision is not 20/20. Also what you perceive as "inconsistent lighting" other can think of it as a flash.
Tiktaalik 6y ago
It's abundantly clear at this point that the media leverage their power and reach to push their agenda and manufacture consent. This is just one new milestone. Not just Fox News either. It was pretty clear that during the democratic primary that MSNBC and NYT were putting their thumb on the scale to select news and design coverage to favour their candidate of choice. Of course media with an agenda is nothing new, early newspapers were straight up published by political parties, but due to media consolidation they now have an incredible ability to bend reality. Remarkable that the media world we live in in 2020 was predicted by of all things, a video game released in 2001, Metal Gear Solid 2. The assertion made by that game that in the future thanks to the internet and deluge of information, it will be impossible to know what is true or not.
- BurningFrog 6y ago
  You're right about mainstream media, but remember that in 2020 we have many alternative media sources. A lot of them are hideously slanted garbage, but I they make for it in volume :) Hopefully in a few years, some new reliable news institutions will have emerged.
  - black_puppydog 6y ago
    Hate to be "that guy" here, but do you see any market mechanisms that will/should lead to more solid, factually reliable outlets? All the ones I see seem to point in the "get much content out fast" direction.
    - BurningFrog 6y ago
      Yeah, I'm more expressing a hope than making a prediction :) It seems like such an essential thing that something is bound to appear. If not though pure market forces, maybe through billionaire philanthropy or something. At minimum, I expect much to change in this field. If in good or bad ways, we'll see.
    - Gibbon1 6y ago
      I keep saying market incentives are limited and have issues with being gamed. Good faith is important. But in the US we've decided that acting in good faith is somehow immoral.
haunter 6y ago
"ABC news is trying to pass gun range videos as combat footage from Syria" (2019) [flagged] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262462 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262462
lordlic 6y ago
I'm bewildered by what line the Seattle Times thinks they're trying to draw here. Looking at the "CRAZY TOWN" headlines in the image in the article is like looking at the covers of tabloids in the checkout aisle. I don't know how anyone could consider what they're seeing there a trustworthy source of factual reporting.
ageofwant 6y ago
The last week or so YouTube has consistently pushed Fox news feeds into my suggested view list. The only 'political' content I occasionally watch is stuff by Mark Blyth... Now I get that Google is just pimping the general outrage addiction and delights in the easy profits from that, but how many times do I have to down-vote a video, and report it as 'inappropriate' before the algorithm gets that i'm just not into this particular brand of horseshit. Come on google, give it a rest. And please 'antifa' is not a thing, and it absolutely means fuck-all to an Australian who could not give a bee's dick about what happens in Trumpistan.
- DesiLurker 6y ago
  thats interesting, I remember seeing that too & I never watch fox. at first I thought maybe my kid has clicked some video but even after flagging not interested and disliking it still keeps coming up. plus all the trump outrage.. just fuck off.
dole 6y ago
If Fox News gave a real shit about truth in journalism they’d either have people in the middle of CHAZ getting the story, or they should be broadcasting that they’re being denied access to a supposedly free zone. As with many media companies, it sounds like they’re sitting back and pushing a narrative. Would you fear for Fox News journalists’ health and welfare in CHAZ?

99 points by erentz 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

I dislike Fox News. They are clearly using these pictures to push a narrative and they absolutely need to be more clear about where and when the pictures came from. However... that first picture was very obviously a collage, complete with inconsistent lighting and a gradient fade. You'd have to believe in ghosts to think that was an undoctored photo.

rbanffy 6y ago
I wouldn't say believing in ghosts is beyond Fox News's audience. The other day, iirc, they even had to warm people against injecting bleach.
- CivBase 6y ago
  Something tells me "phantom protesters" was not the angle they were going for.
  - rbanffy 6y ago
    The only reason they don't go for it is because they don't find it useful.
nkozyra 6y ago
Journalistic standards would dictate that it be clearly labeled photo illustration, in that case.
- CivBase 6y ago
  I 100% agree. But isn't a competing news outlet writing an article about a missing label just a bit on-the-nose? Particularly when considering the photo in question.
  - orwin 6y ago
    I think the fact that it happened 3 time to describe one event warrant a pat on the head and a "we got you" article.
  - nkozyra 6y ago
    I don't follow the "on-the-nose" comment in this context. In theory, the media serves as the public watchdog for government. If media violates the ethical standards they should be called out. The truth is television media has always had low standards for these rules versus print media. That it transfers to their digital properties is no surprise.
    - fredsanford 6y ago
      Television is called a medium because it is neither rare nor well done. Ernie Kovacs sometime in the '60s
Terretta 6y ago
> You’d have to believe in ghosts... Looked at supermarket checkout tabloid covers lately? https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/styles/scale_w1024/s3/static/D8Image/2020/03/15/nationalenquirer-coronaviruscover.jpg https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/styles/scale_w1024/s3/st... The believability bar may be lower than you’d hope.
boomboomsubban 6y ago
I think the first photo was posted as a collage, and the issue with it is more that the photos come from May 30th. The gun carrier's second photo is where the alter is important.
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
If you scroll further in the article, the second image, showing a man in front of the CHAZ sign, is not clearly an edit.
pera 6y ago
It may be obvious if you are watching the full size version on a desktop/laptop screen, but it is not that obvious when you are scrolling through a bunch of thumbnails on your phone and specially if your vision is not 20/20. Also what you perceive as "inconsistent lighting" other can think of it as a flash.

Tiktaalik 6y ago

It's abundantly clear at this point that the media leverage their power and reach to push their agenda and manufacture consent. This is just one new milestone. Not just Fox News either. It was pretty clear that during the democratic primary that MSNBC and NYT were putting their thumb on the scale to select news and design coverage to favour their candidate of choice. Of course media with an agenda is nothing new, early newspapers were straight up published by political parties, but due to media consolidation they now have an incredible ability to bend reality. Remarkable that the media world we live in in 2020 was predicted by of all things, a video game released in 2001, Metal Gear Solid 2. The assertion made by that game that in the future thanks to the internet and deluge of information, it will be impossible to know what is true or not.

BurningFrog 6y ago
You're right about mainstream media, but remember that in 2020 we have many alternative media sources. A lot of them are hideously slanted garbage, but I they make for it in volume :) Hopefully in a few years, some new reliable news institutions will have emerged.
- black_puppydog 6y ago
  Hate to be "that guy" here, but do you see any market mechanisms that will/should lead to more solid, factually reliable outlets? All the ones I see seem to point in the "get much content out fast" direction.
  - BurningFrog 6y ago
    Yeah, I'm more expressing a hope than making a prediction :) It seems like such an essential thing that something is bound to appear. If not though pure market forces, maybe through billionaire philanthropy or something. At minimum, I expect much to change in this field. If in good or bad ways, we'll see.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    I keep saying market incentives are limited and have issues with being gamed. Good faith is important. But in the US we've decided that acting in good faith is somehow immoral.

haunter 6y ago

"ABC news is trying to pass gun range videos as combat footage from Syria" (2019) [flagged] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262462 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262462

lordlic 6y ago

I'm bewildered by what line the Seattle Times thinks they're trying to draw here. Looking at the "CRAZY TOWN" headlines in the image in the article is like looking at the covers of tabloids in the checkout aisle. I don't know how anyone could consider what they're seeing there a trustworthy source of factual reporting.

ageofwant 6y ago

The last week or so YouTube has consistently pushed Fox news feeds into my suggested view list. The only 'political' content I occasionally watch is stuff by Mark Blyth... Now I get that Google is just pimping the general outrage addiction and delights in the easy profits from that, but how many times do I have to down-vote a video, and report it as 'inappropriate' before the algorithm gets that i'm just not into this particular brand of horseshit. Come on google, give it a rest. And please 'antifa' is not a thing, and it absolutely means fuck-all to an Australian who could not give a bee's dick about what happens in Trumpistan.

DesiLurker 6y ago
thats interesting, I remember seeing that too & I never watch fox. at first I thought maybe my kid has clicked some video but even after flagging not interested and disliking it still keeps coming up. plus all the trump outrage.. just fuck off.

dole 6y ago

If Fox News gave a real shit about truth in journalism they’d either have people in the middle of CHAZ getting the story, or they should be broadcasting that they’re being denied access to a supposedly free zone. As with many media companies, it sounds like they’re sitting back and pushing a narrative. Would you fear for Fox News journalists’ health and welfare in CHAZ?