Reuters Quietly Fired Top Editor During Photoshop Scandal
Charles Johnson (H/T: Michelle)
A very interesting report at Photo District News has new information about the Reuters Photoshop scandal: Reuters Investigation Leads To Dismissal Of Editor. (Hat tip: Mark.)
Reuters fired a top photo editor for the Middle East during an internal investigation of two doctored photos from the Israel-Lebanon war that were published last summer.
The editor was the second casualty of the photo manipulation controversy surrounding Reuters freelancer Adnan Hajj. Two of Hajj’s photographs showed obvious signs of digital alterations. Facing a storm of criticism last August, Reuters terminated its relationship with Hajj and pulled more than 900 of his photos from its archive. A Reuters spokesperson said Thursday that the company would not release the name of the editor who was dismissed. ...
Fauxtography: Reuters fired
unnamed photo editor over Adnan Hajj pics
Allahpundit
It’s a shame, and I mean that unironically. When the scandal broke, they investigated promptly, fired Hajj, and pulled not only the two photoshopped photos but 900 more that he had taken. Tom Glocer, Reuters’s CEO, has been admirably candid about digital manipulation within the news industry, and even went so far as to credit Charles Johnson by name in a speech. It was refreshing to see a major media outlet respond to bloggers with civility instead of dismissing them as “partisan politican operatives,” as Dan Rather did, or a “mad blog rabble,” as Kathleen Carroll did (as paraphrased by the New York Times).
But follow that last link and you’ll find Charles asking a good question, made even better by the news about the secret photo editor firing:
Notice how Glocer says they discovered only two photographs that were altered. Yet they immediately removed Adnan Hajj’s entire category and never talked about it again. Were there other altered photographs in there? We’ll apparently never know; the evidence has been “disappeared,” and Reuters seems to have no intention of discussing it.
As it turns out, not only were the photos disappeared, so were the people who knew the most about them. It’s hard not to suspect foul play; otherwise, why fire the editor on the sly? And why blame the editor, anyway? Back in August, Reuters was singing a different tune about how those photoshopped pics ended up on the wires: ...
