Fauxtography

Well, we've all heard the term by now, or at least, most of us have.  "Fauxtography."  This refers to the practice of manipulating photos, changing the captions, or staging entire scenes for the benefit of a camera. 

There have been many instances of fauxtography.  Two links to it are here:  http://mediamythbusters.com/index.php?title=Fauxtography (This LOOKS like Wikipedia, but isn't.)  Sure looks like it in format, though.  Just remember; it's NOT Wikipedia.

And a search of Wikipedia for the term "Fauxtography" returned this link:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War_photographs_controversies

Well, it's happened again.  Again.  From the NYT comes this caption: "In an Iranian Image, a Missile Too Many."  A link to it is here:  http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/in-an-iranian-image-a-missile-too-many/index.html?hp

You might imagine that another firestorm might erupt over this one.  Frankly, I wouldn't blame anybody if it happened.  I'm tired of photos being doctored, arms, limbs, trees, utility poles, entire PEOPLE being removed or added.  I'm tired of smoke being added "for effect."  And then we have CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) doctoring a photo of the Toronto skyline to emphasis global warming.  A link is here:  http://www.politicswatch.com/cbc-june5-2007.htm

Folks, I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier, and yes, I've fallen for a few pranks in my time.  But for the CBC to "miss" this one?  Come on.  A second-grader with a bucket of paint and an Etch A Sketch could do a better job.  Even I'm not that stupid.

Here's a Wikipedia article about journalistic fraud.  Because even the "mainstream" media does it too.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalistic_fraud

Whatever happened to just reporting the news without distortion or concealment?  There is a place for opinions, yes.  The Op-ed pages.  Personal blogs (or journals!) can also be good places for opinions.

But if you're in the media business, you have a responsibility (God, now there's a Politically Incorrect word!!) to keep opinions out of the news, and confined to the Op-ed pages.  That's what they're there for.

Or am I the only one that remembers that?