• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Fake News

Old Gregg said:
Hair saloons?
Click to expand...
This is my favorite post in this thread, which is posted on this website, which is supported by advertising.
Is there any chance that this thread can be dragged back into being more about photography? Or even the power of digital editing tools to change what we understand and accept?
 
"Is there any chance that this thread can be dragged back into being more about photography? Or even the power of digital editing tools to change what we understand and accept?"

Ha nope. I like the idea of fake truth. Editing an image to add credibility to a poorly researched or made-up narrative has to be the worst crime. I think there is a direct progression from what was called propaganda during Wilison's time under Howard Laswell, which became corporate public relations in Ed Bernays time, which now seems to be just what journalism is today. Photomanipulation is just a tool of the trade...like a hammer or highspeed centrifuge...they get more sophisticated but it doesn't mean we do.
 
If you believe that fake news is a new phenomena, you might want to spend an evening watching Ace in the Hole (aka The Big Carnival), a 1951 film noir directed by Billy Wilder starring Kirk Douglas, which explores the relationship between the press, the news, and the audience. It is available on Amazon Video and turns up on Turner Classic Movies from time to time. While you’ll miss the entertainment value of the film, a quick perusal of the plot summary in Wikipedia will tell you all you need to know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace_in_the_Hole_(1951_film)
 
Last edited:
cliveh said:
Do you think Photoshop was a major factor regarding the birth of fake news?....
Click to expand...
No. Stages and/or retouched photos were always there. "Fake" or doctored news were common for centuries.
 
Yes, didn't Uncle Joe have people who were experts at airbrushing you out of photographs? Might be nice if they could share their expertise and secrets with us. Of course it might raise the average age of Photrio's membership quite a lot but, heh, we are so old anyway so that may not matter

pentaxuser
 

YES! It is aggravating to say the least. For example, I know more than just a few things about Harley-Davidson Motorcycles and I see errors on the web quite often. One big error was on HD's own web site. These mistakes and errors will not end the world, but they point to just how lazy some writers seem to be.

I see errors about certain materials like celluloid nitrate and casein plastics. These errors will not end the world, perhaps. Just one more example of a lack of fact checking.

This is what can sometimes happen when anyone with an internet connection is given the freedom to publish without question.

I recall a story about Reader's Digest. A writer claimed the Pope stood so many feet and inches high and the story editor called the Vatican to confirm the Pope's vital statistics. Like it really makes any difference if they miss it by a few inches. In an article the Pope will never see.

Photo Shop is one reason we see fake images. A lack of proper editing and fact checking is another. PS is not evil, but it is a part of the problem. There is a painfully long list of writers that made up their stories. Remember James Frey?

Bob
 
Last night I was drinking with a buddy and we got into a “discussion “ about something, so to prove me wrong he googled and wiki’d it. Some of the facts he quoted were correct, some incorrect, and some so ambiguous that they would apply to anything at all. As I continued to debate and assess the alleged facts he pounded his fist on the bar and he ejaculated, “life is a lot simpler if you just believe what you read and see on the internet!”

Judging by his stress level versus mine… he is correct.
 
To put this thread back into a historical perspective, there's been mistrust of the press ever since there's been such a thing as the press - which is not that long ago, when you think about it (a little more than 4 centuries) -, mostly because early "newspapers" were essentially produced by governments themselves and that the idea of an independent press did not take hold until late in the 19th century (not to mention that "independent" in no case necessarily means unbiased).

Trump's use of the term "fake news" taps into that mistrust, which has expanded this past century. But he did not invent this. In Germany the term Lügenpresse (the lying press) had been used as a propaganda tool throughout the later part of the 19th century, but it is the Nazis who used it widely as a tool to discredit both the local Jewish press as well as all foreign press criticizing their politics.
 
The earliest example of fake news may be the relief carving on the Temple of Karnak in Egypt showing Ramses II absolutely defeating the Hittites at the battle of Kadesh in 1275BCE. In reality the battle was a closely fought draw and Ramses II probably avoided defeat by saving his forces and retreating early.
 
Reminds me of body counts in Vietnam.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Any "news" with narrative is fake.

And if you think of PS been involved, it is not news. News are posted almost instantly these days. No time for dinking with the image.
Click to expand...

I recall some images of OJ Simpson in our local papers. Perhaps your papers as well. The images were not fake; they were mug shots. The images of OJ were dark and ominous. Other similar types of images were a tad flatter and looked like standard mug shots.

When i looked at these images, I wondered just how hard the editors had to look to find the most unflattering picture of OJ. The images we see might not be edited, but if an editor has an agenda and wants to "get" you, there is still some form of manipulation. How an image is presented can affect how people view you.

Bob
 
PerTulip said:
No. Stages and/or retouched photos were always there. "Fake" or doctored news were common for centuries.
Click to expand...

What modern tools have done is make it easier to tell a lie or obscure the truth in print. Anyone can publish a book or create a web site and there is no editorial control. The effect of this is simply too much stuff on the web you cannot believe. PS would have made my job easier back in the day. Rather, eliminated my job back in the day.

What concerns me are the deep fakes, in all their forms. Video and still images. Right now, today, as we e-speak, there are articles written by AI. It is difficult to tell from reading them.

Bob
 

Current Canadian PM Black Face mocking was real. Yet, those whom he has mocked are voting for in crowds.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
And if you think of PS been involved, it is not news
Click to expand...
hi Ko.Fe
in order to get the image from the camera to the news organ PS is involved so does this mean that if there are photographs to illustrate the event it is not to be trusted and it is not news? ... that is unless it is a cellphone seeing newshound are all around and use cellphones to upload to the FB or IG or whatever account...
 

I have never had my mugshot taken (unless you count school photos). How many mug shots do the police usually take so the editor of the newspaper has a selection from which to choose the most dark and ominous?
 
Last edited:
faberryman said:
I have never had my mugshot taken (unless you count school photos). How many mug shots do the police usually take so the editor of the newspaper has a selection from which to choose the most dark and ominous?
Click to expand...

I want one of the fancy setups that shoot forward and profile.

Dark and ominous. OJ is a psycho.
 

Hi jnantz.
I work in the broadcast. Was one of the engineers participated in first digital signal (SDI) newsroom build.
PS takes time. These days if you are not live, it is not news, but the past . You don't need FB, IG ,whatever account, if you stream from your phone to your newsroom.
5G network is already in use to stream from remote locations directly to the studio. Just another live feed.
But even FB and YT have live feed support now .
 
Craig75 said:
Probably democratised the creation of fake news from highly specialised very skilled darkroom work into something everyone can do
Click to expand...

I don’t agree. Even with the best tools, the result will be totally dependent on the user’s ability with them (I’ve read this a couple of times in the numerous Leica-related threads that are trending here).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register