Photoshop: Media Bias on Display

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Breotan**

Every so often one of the news networks does something that is pretty egregious when it comes to pushing a narrative. I'm not just talking about writing a "hit piece" about some public figure the author doesn't like, I'm talking about actual, demonstrable altering of the facts to suit the newsroom prejudices. Now, I don't want to rehash the substance of any linked or quoted story, I would like to discuss instances where media alter facts (photos, recordings, videos, etc.) to suite a preconceived narrative.

We've seen this with ABC's Dateline program where they staged an explosion to make General Motors trucks look like deathtraps. GM pounced on this, found the actual truck ABC used and proved that ABC put an "incendiary device" on the tank to make it explode. In other words ABC doctored the evidence to drive the narrative. More recently, NBC altered the 911 call made by George Zimmerman to push the idea that Zimmerman was a racist white man regardless of the truth.

Well, it happened again. This time in the recent Oregon shooting. CNN found a picture of the shooter on social media and doctored it to make the shooter look like a Caucasian. It fact, the altered picture makes the guy look a little like a skinhead without tatoos. EDIT: Polonius linked to a Snopes article where it shows this was all a fake put forth by a Twitter troll. I've removed the Alec Jones article and replaced it with the one from Snopes.

http://m.snopes.com/cnn-altered-photo-umpqua-shooter/

Black or White or Fake?

FACT CHECK: Does an image show a photograph of Umpqua shooter Chris Harper-Mercer altered by CNN to make him appear white?

Claim: Image shows a photograph of Umpqua shooter Chris Harper-Mercer altered by CNN to make him appear white.

FALSE

Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2015]

Facebook post saying CNN altered their photos of the Umpqua C C, Oregon school shooter to make him look more Caucasian.

Origins: Shortly after nine people were killed in a shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, on 1 October 2015, several web sites such as The Gateway Pundit, Conservative Treehouse, andMegynKelly.org (the unofficial web site of Fox News commentator Megyn Kelly) claimed that the CNN news channel had altered a photograph of gunman Chris Harper-Mercer (who identified himself as being of mixed race) in order to make him appear Caucasian:

None of the aforementioned web sites offered any proof that CNN had actually altered the photograph: they provided no links to where the image had originally appeared nor offered any screenshots showing that CNN had aired the altered image on television. They simply posted the above-displayed photograph and claimed, without any evidence, that CNN was responsible for creating and displaying it.

While the exact origins of the image are unclear, comments left on the Conservative Treehouse‘s article indicated that the photograph was created by Twitter user @0Hour1:

Brian Stelter, CNN’s senior media correspondent, took to Twitter on 4 October 2015 to address the photograph and confirm that it was not used by CNN:

Other iterations of the rumor maintain the image displayed above was created as an example to illustrate what CNN had done, and the altered photograph of Harper-Mercer displayed by the network was actually this one:

Looks like they removed some moles, too.

Edited title for better accuracy. Edited post to rid the thread of AJ.

**LordofHats**

I'm uncertain how having a black mom means he can't be a white power nutter. Surely we've all heard of the "Self-hating Jew" and other such phenomena. Having a non-White parent doesn't automatically make you a beacon of tolerance.

That said, yeah the picture totally weird. The original could afford a little clean up, which would 'whiten' up the overall image, but the final product is ridiculously white. It's like the photo editing staff is the same crew who did all the lighting for the Twilight films @_@

**d-usa**

It's also worth noting that the "original" is about as far away from his actual skin-tone as the "photoshop". Looks more like someone did a lazy "auto-adjust" than a vast conspiracy though.

But leave it to Alex Jones to use a picture that makes him look "black" while talking about conspiracies to make him look "white".

Mixed race is mixed race.

**Ouze**

Not just auto-adjust, as the background is the mostly same. Someone used the selection tool to adjust the contrast and levels.

Where is the actual CNN story with the image? Or was this on the air?

**MrMoustaffa**

Jesus I'm a ginger and even I'm not that white

**ScootyPuffJunior**

Wake up, sheeple! Thank goodness Infowars had the courage to stand up to the lamestream media and break this story!

Never has there been a paragon of truth and virtue like Alex Jones et al.

**Ouze**

Also, not to engage in whataboutism, but just to expand upon the OP's premise - there are some other examples of media outlets engaging in this, if you hadn't heard. Off the top of my head:

OJ was darkened by Time
Beyonce was lightened a few different times, here is one example
There was some couple who had a bunch of kids, if i recall, and Time (again!) fixed the lady's teeth.
fox news ran a story where it was criticizing some other journalists, and it made their teeth yellow, and exaggerated their facial features.

Those are the big ones I remember.

Also, before I hop on what could be yet another right-wing-derposphere lie-train, I'd like to see an image of the whole screen. I haven't seen that yet.

**Breotan**

Ouze wrote:
Not just auto-adjust, as the background is the mostly same. Someone used the selection tool to adjust the contrast and levels.

Where is the actual CNN story with the image? Or was this on the air?

I'm not sure. I think it was on the air sometime. I don't see it on CNN's website though.

**Ouze**

yeah I re-read, and it said it was on the air... but there are no images of the entire screen. For all I know, they photoshopped the damn thing themselves.

On the one hand, we have the right-wing lie-o-sphere, which is repeatedly willing to make gak up because lol, why not? and on the other hand we have CNN, who are an embarrassment to journalism. Who are you supposed to trust?

It's like something out of Saw.

**LordofHats**

While I have no love for Alex Jones, I don't think he's outrageous enough to actually pull something like that. It probably aired, and it probably looked that ridiculous, and it probably wasn't a conspiracy so much as someone in a rush fethed up the photo editing because the original image isn't the kind of quality anyone puts on TV either.

**Breotan**

While not photoshopped, I remember the whole Brian Williams scandal and the resulting meme that came out of it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=brian+williams+meme&espv=2&biw=1569&bih=922&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMImsXqvImsyAIVwZINCh1crwIw#tbm=isch&q=brian+williams+meme+i+was+there

**d-usa**

If Alex Jones is all we have to rely on that this picture actually was aired, then it is probably a non-story.

I have to admit that I'm kind of disappointed by Infowars though. On air whitening is a pretty low bar for them to aim for. You would think they would make fun of Obama for only being able to hire a half-white guy for their false flag operation in preparation for the race war and ultimate disarmament of the public.

**Breotan**

Um, this isn't about AJ's politics. It's about when media doctors things like photos, videos, recordings, etc.

**whembly**

Perfect example is the Killian Documents, aka Memogate, DanRatherGate...

Watch out for the movie...

**LordofHats**

Breotan wrote:
While not photoshopped, I remember the whole Brian Williams scandal and the resulting meme that came out of it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=brian+williams+meme&espv=2&biw=1569&bih=922&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMImsXqvImsyAIVwZINCh1crwIw#tbm=isch&q=brian+williams+meme+i+was+there

This one's my favorite;

There is a funny Cracked article along these lines (Guess who got the #3 slot

).

**d-usa**

Breotan wrote:
Um, this isn't about AJ's politics. It's about when media doctors things like photos, videos, recordings, etc.

This is a thread about a picture AJ claims was aired and what he claims that means.

Talking about his track record and political motivations is fair game when we are deciding if we should take this claim seriously.

**Polonius**

Guys, Snopes is a thing:

http://m.snopes.com/cnn-altered-photo-umpqua-shooter/

They say false.

**Psienesis**

This is a very simple issue to resolve:

Q: Should I trust Alec Jones on anything, anything at all?
A: No.

**nels1031**

LordofHats wrote:
This one's my favorite;

Spoiler:

There is a funny Cracked article along these lines (Guess who got the #3 slot ).

The one where he claims to have been personally beheaded by al Qaeda is my favorite.

**Ghazkuul**

d-usa wrote:
Breotan wrote:
Um, this isn't about AJ's politics. It's about when media doctors things like photos, videos, recordings, etc.

This is a thread about a picture AJ claims was aired and what he claims that means.

Talking about his track record and political motivations is fair game when we are deciding if we should take this claim seriously.

Well actually no you are completely wrong. The OP even pointed out he was talking about the Media's bias and how they photo shopped in general, not this one specific example.

**LordofHats**

Polonius wrote:
Guys, Snopes is a thing:

http://m.snopes.com/cnn-altered-photo-umpqua-shooter/

They say false.

And thus my expectations reach a new low.

**d-usa**

LordofHats wrote:
Polonius wrote:
Guys, Snopes is a thing:

http://m.snopes.com/cnn-altered-photo-umpqua-shooter/

They say false.

And thus my expectations reach a new low.

Mine was met.

**Breotan**

Polonius wrote:
Guys, Snopes is a thing:

http://m.snopes.com/cnn-altered-photo-umpqua-shooter/

They say false.

Really? Now THAT is interesting. It also explains why other more reputable outfits haven't been running with the story. Talk about Epic Trolling.

**cincydooley**

You could always replace "whitening or darkening a photo" with "running a 6 year old photo."

It happens on both sides. I think it's a bit foolish to say it doesn't.

We let it happen.

**Breotan**

Okay. I've updated the OP to use Snopes article instead of the other, less reputable, obviously not sourced properly, article.

**Ghazkuul**

Ouze wrote:
yeah I re-read, and it said it was on the air... but there are no images of the entire screen. For all I know, they photoshopped the damn thing themselves.

On the one hand, we have the right-wing lie-o-sphere, which is repeatedly willing to make gak up because lol, why not? and on the other hand we have CNN, who are an embarrassment to journalism. Who are you supposed to trust?

It's like something out of Saw.

Could you by any chance keep your raging hatred for anything conservative in check a little bit? From your post you make it sound like only Right wing/conservatives lie or spin things. It would be nice for a more neutral tone

**Psienesis**

cincydooley wrote:
You could always replace "whitening or darkening a photo" with "running a 6 year old photo."

It happens on both sides. I think it's a bit foolish to say it doesn't.

We let it happen.

In some cases, that may be the only photos that exist of a person. I know, for myself, finding a photograph of me taken within the last 6 years is going to be extremely difficult without access to certain corporate resources the media doesn't generally get.

**Breotan**

Turned out he wasn't off base this time, Ghazkuul. AJ grabbed onto this and ran with it when they shouldn't have. All three cable news networks are pretty much embarrassing to the point that Jon Stewart made a career off of using clips from their shows.

But that's the point of this thread. Right, left, or whatever, news publishers sometimes make stuff up. Or, in this case get thoroughly trolled.

cincydooley wrote:
You could always replace "whitening or darkening a photo" with "running a 6 year old photo."

Ah, yes. The shooting of Michael Brown. I guess that qualifies as the news agencies quickly found out that the photo was old and that Michael didn't look that way the day he was shot. The "DSHU" crowd is still using it to this day.

**cincydooley**

Psienesis wrote:

In some cases, that may be the only photos that exist of a person.

In some of the more 'popular" instances from recent history, we all know this was decidedly not the case.

**d-usa**

I think part of the problem is that people are still expecting actual bias-free news from any of the cable news networks.

If your source of news is trying to fill 24/7 "news" programming on multiple channels, then you can pretty much guarantee that they have some sort of agenda to get viewers. Now they may also have a political agenda as well, but you are pretty much guaranteed that they have a programming agenda for one simple reason: ratings.

FoxNews really knocked it out of the park when they realized that the existing cable networks were reporting anywhere from center to left-of-center and multiple networks were fighting for the same viewers. So they decided to go after the conservative viewers by giving them news that included everything that they wanted to hear. Since then MSNBC has caught on to that trend and decided to be the liberal FoxNews to get that ultra-liberal slice of the viewer-pie. The other networks are trying to get whatever viewers aren't in the super-partisan camps for their portion of the ratings.

The news don't have a bias because THEY want you to believe the story. They have a bias because YOU want to believe the story. And by making sure to provide what you want to believe they are making sure that you keep on turning in to their channel for your share of the news. Because in the end cable news is a for profit business and they are not in the business of reporting news, they are in the business of running commercials. And bias = viewers, and viewers = ratings.