I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that first story is the same thing.
They gave the General a more aesthetically appealing background. It is unethical from a photojournalistic standpoint, where failing to check whether "Michelle" is spelled with one L or two for the cutline is also considered unethical — but I don't think most people would consider it deceitful. Family photos taken in a studio very often have false backgrounds, but very seldom do people look at their shelves and mourn that the photos of their loved ones are all lies.
Even the second story is not really the same thing. It's more obviously deceitful, but it is still attempting to convey truthful information — that is the guy who died, and he wore a uniform like that — rather than attempting to mislead the viewer. It would appear that they didn't have a photo that conveyed the information they wanted, so they pieced it together. At its heart, it is much like using a sketch when you don't have a photo. The message is all truthful, so it is still a step above the propaganda discussed in the OP.
One would assume this is part of a process which is permitted by upper levels of their government. After all, what do they do when they cannot deliver and someone upstairs expects it?
Imagine the destruction they could Photoshop onto America. We better disable Google satellite view before they erase our homes and rain pixelated fire down on the entire country. Oh, the horror!
[+] [-] jacquesm|13 years ago|reply
Two examples from the United States.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7738342.stm
http://observers.france24.com/content/20080924-us-army-photo...
The Chinese even used footage from TopGun in a propaganda piece:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8291729...
What I don't get is that the Iranians and those responsible for the US photoshops think that this sort of thing will go unnoticed.
[+] [-] chc|13 years ago|reply
They gave the General a more aesthetically appealing background. It is unethical from a photojournalistic standpoint, where failing to check whether "Michelle" is spelled with one L or two for the cutline is also considered unethical — but I don't think most people would consider it deceitful. Family photos taken in a studio very often have false backgrounds, but very seldom do people look at their shelves and mourn that the photos of their loved ones are all lies.
Even the second story is not really the same thing. It's more obviously deceitful, but it is still attempting to convey truthful information — that is the guy who died, and he wore a uniform like that — rather than attempting to mislead the viewer. It would appear that they didn't have a photo that conveyed the information they wanted, so they pieced it together. At its heart, it is much like using a sketch when you don't have a photo. The message is all truthful, so it is still a step above the propaganda discussed in the OP.
[+] [-] Shivetya|13 years ago|reply
I wonder if they will photoshop the bomb.
[+] [-] Irregardless|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jakeonthemove|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] islon|13 years ago|reply