3 ms·

I wonder what the story is behind the Getty photo of it in that article. It doesn’t look like a photo that could have been taken in the 60s or the 80s. Does tha

I wonder what the story is behind the Getty photo of it in that article. It doesn’t look like a photo that could have been taken in the 60s or the 80s. Does that mean it’s misidentified on Getty?

bmitc 3y ago
That's an interesting point. I'm not sure as I'm not familiar with the bird. After some searching it seems it could be a different apecies in that photo. It seems the depictions of the Bachman's warbler show it to have more black on top. I have no idea though.
burkaman 3y ago
It's a different species, I think a yellow-browed warbler (see here for example https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/yellow-browed-warbler https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/yellow-browed-war...). The Bachman's warbler looks pretty different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachman%27s_warbler#/media/File:Dendroica_bachmanii.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachman%27s_warbler#/media/Fil.... I can't find that photo on Getty so I'm not sure if it's mislabeled, or the editor just searched for "warbler", or got it from somewhere else and forgot to change the photo credit from an article template or something. Edit: It seems to be from Shutterstock and is labeled correctly https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellowbrowed-warbler-phylloscopus-inornatus-on-branch-356073638 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellowbrowed-warble.... My best guess is an overworked web producer was told to find a photo for this article, searched for "warbler" in some integrated stock photo search engine, picked this one and copy/pasted the wrong credit.
- hm-nah 3y ago
  It looked different.
- jehb 3y ago
  I went on a microcrusade of sending correction requests last week after a series of articles (coincidentally, also in North Carolina and also about macrobiology) were published about a chigger-borne illness coming to the state, but all of the stories used a lede image of a red velvet mite, not a chigger. The reason? It's one of the first images that pop up when you punch 'chigger' into Google, and it appears to be licensed (and mislabeled) by Getty. Tracking the image back to its original source, it was clearly identified as a red velvet mite. I wish publications wouldn't do this. A completely random lede image would be better than showing a picture of an animal that people will now believe is the one the article was talking about.

I wonder what the story is behind the Getty photo of it in that article. It doesn’t look like a photo that could have been taken in the 60s or the 80s. Does that mean it’s misidentified on Getty?

bmitc 3y ago

That's an interesting point. I'm not sure as I'm not familiar with the bird. After some searching it seems it could be a different apecies in that photo. It seems the depictions of the Bachman's warbler show it to have more black on top. I have no idea though.

burkaman 3y ago

It's a different species, I think a yellow-browed warbler (see here for example https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/yellow-browed-warbler https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/yellow-browed-war...). The Bachman's warbler looks pretty different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachman%27s_warbler#/media/File:Dendroica_bachmanii.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachman%27s_warbler#/media/Fil.... I can't find that photo on Getty so I'm not sure if it's mislabeled, or the editor just searched for "warbler", or got it from somewhere else and forgot to change the photo credit from an article template or something. Edit: It seems to be from Shutterstock and is labeled correctly https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellowbrowed-warbler-phylloscopus-inornatus-on-branch-356073638 https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellowbrowed-warble.... My best guess is an overworked web producer was told to find a photo for this article, searched for "warbler" in some integrated stock photo search engine, picked this one and copy/pasted the wrong credit.

hm-nah 3y ago
It looked different.
jehb 3y ago
I went on a microcrusade of sending correction requests last week after a series of articles (coincidentally, also in North Carolina and also about macrobiology) were published about a chigger-borne illness coming to the state, but all of the stories used a lede image of a red velvet mite, not a chigger. The reason? It's one of the first images that pop up when you punch 'chigger' into Google, and it appears to be licensed (and mislabeled) by Getty. Tracking the image back to its original source, it was clearly identified as a red velvet mite. I wish publications wouldn't do this. A completely random lede image would be better than showing a picture of an animal that people will now believe is the one the article was talking about.