[Bobboau]

I think it should have had it's own thread a while ago, I tried starting one twice.

[Sandwich]

The attached image is NOT REAL (AFAIK), but it's still amusing... sorta...

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Nuclear1]

What are people's opinions on all the false media stuff being exposed recently? I know what I think, and I know what some people here think, but what's the general consensus around where you are?

Funny, I saw this a while back, and it only reinforces my position that the media tends to do a rather shoddy job with checking its sources in the region and making sure that its news is accurate. Yes, the story is a good few years old, but things don't seem to have changed much recently.

Sadly, nobody seems to really get the fact around where I live that the media is honestly and truly messed up when it comes to reporting the Middle East--yeah, I live in a red state, but there are still the typical liberals and conservatives that will argue whatever they see on CNN, FOX, or read on the BBC (for the more Enlightened Individuals ) is automatic fact with no room for error. There's very little demand for the agencies to be held accountable for making sure their stories aren't 100% manufactured as a lot of them seem to be.

[aldo_14]

The attached image is NOT REAL (AFAIK), but it's still amusing... sorta...

Very Godwin.

What are people's opinions on all the false media stuff being exposed recently? I know what I think, and I know what some people here think, but what's the general consensus around where you are?

Funny, I saw this a while back, and it only reinforces my position that the media tends to do a rather shoddy job with checking its sources in the region and making sure that its news is accurate. Yes, the story is a good few years old, but things don't seem to have changed much recently.

Sadly, nobody seems to really get the fact around where I live that the media is honestly and truly messed up when it comes to reporting the Middle East--yeah, I live in a red state, but there are still the typical liberals and conservatives that will argue whatever they see on CNN, FOX, or read on the BBC (for the more Enlightened Individuals ) is automatic fact with no room for error. There's very little demand for the agencies to be held accountable for making sure their stories aren't 100% manufactured as a lot of them seem to be.

It's worth me pointing out, I think, that the BBC has a statutory and legal requirement for fairness and truth, unlike US news sources - so there is accountability (this actually applies to all TV and Radio media in the UK, but not paper media such as newspapers).

[Nuclear1]

It's worth me pointing out, I think, that the BBC has a statutory and legal requirement for fairness and truth, unlike US news sources - so there is accountability (this actually applies to all TV and Radio media in the UK, but not paper media such as newspapers).

Sure, and I wasn't bashing the BBC in particular, it just happened to be the first news agency beyond FOX and CNN that popped into my head. My point was that people where I live tend to just blindly follow what the media says, and while they point fingers and accuse the other side of bias and shoddy reporting, they appear to be oblivious to the fact that their own sources are very likely just as messed up.

Needless to say, I don't trust any source of media in particular. I much rather prefer to look at a story through at least three or four different sources and draw my own conclusions.

[karajorma]

Lets take a close look at those photos. The link you give us is very careful not to show the original while talking about how they were doctored.

Judge for yourselves.



Not the difference that they were trying to make out it was. The report you linked to wants the viewer to form the impression that all the black smoke was digitally added and that there wasn't smoke rising all over the city. But the original picture clearly shows that there was a lot of smoke.

Furthermore it's worth pointing out that Reuters have removed every single picture by Adnan Hajj from there database and said that they are not accepting any further pictures from him. Oddly enough that isn't mentioned in the report.

And where did this information come from while we're at it? Little Green Footballs. I wouldn't trust LGF if the site told me the sky was blue.

Johnson has stated many times that he is disgusted with media coverage of the death of ISM activist Rachel Corrie, who was killed in Rafah, a town in the Gaza Strip.

Johnson disputes the official account, claiming that Corrie jumped in front of a bulldozer 'while trying to "protect” a house used for drugs and weapons smuggling'

vs

    "The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in.

    "The driver and his commanders were interrogated extensively over a long period of time with the use of polygraph tests and video evidence. They had no knowledge that she was standing in the path of the tractor. An autopsy of Corrie's body revealed that the cause of death was from falling debris and not from the tractor physically rolling over her. It was a tragic accident that never should have happened.

That is the official Isreali finding on the matter. Many people consider this to have been a whitewash as eyewitness reports state that she was run over by the bulldozer and that it was no accident and yet the site LGF can't even agree with that and has to claim that she martyred herself because she supported terrorists. So LGF is stating a story which no one present at the death of the woman agrees with.

While we're at it

Critics point to the hyperbolic language, references to violence against Arabs, Muslims, and liberals and ethnic slurs employed by some commenters and charge the webmaster with encouraging groupthink, jingoism, anti-Arabism and "Islamophobia". Supporters argue that using slurs is acceptable, given "there is a fine tradition of dehumanizing the enemy in our foreign wars"

LGF is a ****ing joke. It sets out to pull the wool over it's readers eyes every bit as much as Adnan Hajj did with the fake photos.

Yet again the actions of both sides are despicable.

[Sandwich]

Lets take a close look at those photos. The link you give us is very careful not to show the original while talking about how they were doctored.

Judge for yourselves.



Not the difference that they were trying to make out it was. The report you linked to wants the viewer to form the impression that all the black smoke was digitally added and that there wasn't smoke rising all over the city. But the original picture clearly shows that there was a lot of smoke.

Furthermore it's worth pointing out that Reuters have removed every single picture by Adnan Hajj from there database and said that they are not accepting any further pictures from him. Oddly enough that isn't mentioned in the report.

Oh, I fully agree that the change in "amount of smoke" is not the drastic difference it may be understood by some to be. But that's not the issue here. The issue is the alterations, period - regardless of how drasticly they change the reader's mind. Obviously, Reuters is trying to react responsibly to this thing, but since any 7-year-old could see that that photo was doctored, the question it raises in my mind is of the quality (or lack thereof) of Reuters or AP's "quality control", as it were.

While the damage done with the smoke alteration is not very dramatic at all, what about that lady supposedly grieving over the destruction of her home - at two points in time separated by two weeks? Something like that definitely has potential to affect the viewer's opinion.

My point is this (pardon the cliche, but there's a reason cliches are oft repeated - they have a point). If news agencies cannot be trustworthy in small things, how can you trust them in large things?

In response to Rachel Corrie's death, I will just say that I worked with and alongside (literally) D9's in my army service, and soldiers were always reminded about the dangers of getting close to one in operation, since the operator has terrible visibility. IIRC, there have been Israeli soldiers who have been accidentally run over by D9's after getting too close.

I'm not saying that Rachel Corrie's death was ok since it was an accident. I'm simply saying that I do not believe it to have been intentional in any way, shape, or form.

[karajorma]

I wasn't intending to reopen whether it was an accident or not but simply point out that LGF continues push a theory which not even the Israeli government were willing to believe. Whether you believe the government or not I don't think anyone sensible believes their line that she martyred herself to protect terrorists.

Which makes everything from LGF suspect. You need more proof of this kind of distortion of the truth? Let me point you to this letter the Muslim Council of Britain sent to Tony Blair

    Prime Minister, As British Muslims we urge you to do more to fight against all those who target civilians with violence, whenever and wherever that happens.

    It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad.

    To combat terror the government has focused extensively on domestic legislation. While some of this will have an impact, the government must not ignore the role of its foreign policy.

    The debacle of Iraq and now the failure to do more to secure an immediate end to the attacks on civilians in the Middle East not only increases the risk to ordinary people in that region, it is also ammunition to extremists who threaten us all.

    Attacking civilians is never justified. This message is a global one. We urge the Prime Minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy to show the world that we value the lives of civilians wherever they live and whatever their religion.

    Such a move would make us all safer.

Nothing wrong with that. They're simply saying that the mess Britain and the US have made in Iraq is stirring up resentment and making terrorist attacks more likely. So why has that appeared on the LGF website under the headline UK Muslim Groups Issue Veiled Threats?


And that's why I want to know more about where these other photos came from. Were they all from Adnan Hajj? Is this an attempt to blame the entire media because one single reporter has been dressing up the truth? Bit hard to tell seeing as no one gives any sources for any of the other pictures.
 Cause lets face it the smoke photo is the only one that's really obvious. You have to look pretty hard or have a long memory to get the others.

[kasperl]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4787857.stm

Good news, at last, it seems.

[IPAndrews]

Ceasefire agreed.

[Sandwich]

Ceasefire ignored?

[IPAndrews]

BBC's wording on news 24 was interesting. They said the Lebanese goverment had agreed a ceasefire along with the Israeli Cabiinet. Thing is, I thought Israel were fighting Hezbollah not the Lebanese goverment. So we'll have to see how this plays out. The rockets may well continue flying after tommorow.

[vyper]

As confusing as it is, you have to remember that the UN is negotiating a ceasefire between nations. They're trying to effectively set up joint operations between Israel, Lebanon and the UN in stopping Hezbollah.

Ordering the return of the two soldiers gives the UN and Lebanese joint task force the authority to stop Hezbollah in its tracks once they actually get on the ground.

[IPAndrews]

As confusing as it is, you have to remember that the UN is negotiating a ceasefire between nations. They're trying to effectively set up joint operations between Israel, Lebanon and the UN in stopping Hezbollah.

Shame they couldn't have done that before this all started 

[vyper]

Oh I agree, but then I doubt either side would have agreed at that point.

[IPAndrews]

And right there you've hit the nail on the head. 

[karajorma]

They weren't given much of an option to either anyway.

[Sandwich]

Well, it's 1:30am here, and the ceasefire goes into effect in 5.5 hours. It will be interesting to see what exactly happens.

[vyper]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4789083.stm

My sympathy for the lebanese is dwindling.

[Nuclear1]

Wait, so 1000+ of their civilians dead isn't enough of a deciding factor? What the hell are these idiots waiting for?!