May 13, 2004
MAYBE THEY CAN FIRE BARNICLE AGAIN?:
(via ef brown):
Boston Globe publishes bogus GI rape pictures (Sherrie Gossett, May 12, 2004, WorldNetDaily.com)
Boston residents got more than they bargained for this morning when their copy of the Globe came complete with graphic photographic images depicting U.S. troops gang-raping Iraqi women.Problem is the photos are fake. They were taken from pornographic websites and disseminated by anti-American propagandists, as first reported by WND a week ago.
WND contacted the Globe to question staff about the photos.
Asked whether the photos were the same as the porn photos WND already investigated, reporter Donovan Slack said, "I have no idea. I'm surprised the editor even decided we should write about it."
She added: "Oh my God, I'm scared to answer the phone today."
"It's insane," said Slack. "Can you imagine getting this with your cup of coffee in the morning? Somehow it got through all our checks. Our publisher's not having a very good day today."
Slack sent the photos to WND, which immediately confirmed they were the same porn photos reported on last week.
Boston Globe apologies for running photo of graphic, unauthenticated picture (ASSOCIATED PRESS, May 13, 2004)
The Boston Globe apologized Thursday for running a photo containing sexually graphic images that purported to show U.S. soldiers raping Iraqi women.
Isn't this a case of what the media thinks happened there being more revealing about themselves? Posted by Orrin Judd at May 13, 2004 1:34 PM
Exactly so. They believed it was true because it fit their worldview. Pathetic.
Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at May 13, 2004 1:47 PMAt this point, the next set of "photos" will show Rumsfeld and Bush cavorting with the guards, while the Iraqi prisoners cower like little victims. And someone will publish them, saying that Bush is worse than Saddam Hussein. This whole issue has become an orgiastic moment for the left, but they keep forgetting about being respected in the morning.
Posted by: jim hamlen at May 13, 2004 2:32 PMA low, dishonest decade.
Excuse me, but I suddenly need to take a long shower.
Posted by: Peter B at May 13, 2004 2:37 PMConsidering this information was on the internet last week, and the fact that the Globe's Alex Beam screwed up his story on weblogs two years ago by falling for Bjorn Staerk's April Fool's Day joke, I would think the paper's editor's have a lot of 'splain' to do (of course, given their likely elitism they; A. Don't read blogs, and B. even if they did, would only read ones to the left of Joshua Micha Marshall).
Posted by: John at May 13, 2004 3:05 PMThe Professor links to an equally lame -- or lamer -- retraction of the same in the Toronto Globe.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at May 13, 2004 5:12 PMI wrote to the Globe's ombudsperson yesterday demanding the resignations of everyone in the newspaper's chain of command including:
NYT owner Pinch Sulzberger
Boston Globe publisher Martin Barron
The city editor
The photographer
The reporter
Instead, they didn't even acknowledge that the images were fakes from a porn site. These people are so contemptible.
Posted by: Melissa at May 13, 2004 7:02 PM"Photo Fakery," published some years ago by Dino Brugioni, is a good handbook about spotting fakes.
It came out before Photoshop, and if there's a good guide to spotting digital fakes, I'd like to hear about it. (The vetting I've seen on the Net is unsystematic and not very helpful.)
(Not relevant to anything, maybe, except for our family-values president and the somewhat indiscriminate praise he enjoys here, but one of Brugioni's prime examples is a Bush 1992 campaign photo of the large and loving Bush family, a fake, since all the Bushes never did get together in real life.)
Posted by: Harry Eagar at May 13, 2004 8:43 PMSucks; including the "retraction." As Dr. Dean would scream ... eeaaghee!!!
Posted by: genecis at May 13, 2004 9:17 PM