Alan,
Actually I suspect you are too cynical. Most PJs are scrupulously honest in their images. I have not read anyone trying to defend what Walski did. Quite the contrary, the PJs were almost to a person appalled at his action, as it casts doubt on the entire profession. It is hammered into the PJ in school (and to some degree on the job) that news photos are NOT to be altered.
Layout editors, on the other hand, do not always hold to the same standards. And I won't speak for The National Enquirer and its ilk.
My opinion is that TV networks use so many still images because it captures a moment in time, which can be much more dramatic than boring videos, which are seldom edited to appropriate lengths and are left to run too long. If I thought that the networks were altering photos, I would not watch them any longer. Oh wait, I don't watch them now. I get my news from my regional newspaper and NPR. My television is only hooked to a VCR.
peace,
rand
| Wonder how much work slipped through before getting found out? Has | everyone noticed how much the TV networks use still footage? In my opinion | it is because it is easier to alter and propagandize with. Not being | cynical am I? | | AZ
I was listing to NPR this morning (Friday) and a journalist (not with NPR) brought up the Walski story. She said the picture was altered to show the Brit aiming his rifle AT the civilian with the child - just the opposite of the facts. If you look at the pictures the final version was the most benign. Now let's see which version of the "truth" gets repeated most often and by whom.
This just in: Sadam boasted that HE won the war in an interview from his villa in the south of France with Geraldo Rivera (GR promised not to reveal the location).
AZ Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book. http://www.panoramacamera.us
