snapped shot

It's an AP Photo, so I can't show you the full thing. I'm kinda hoping that I can show you a heavily-cropped version, though. From the continued anti-Danish outrage in Pakistan, we learn what a real picture of Denmark looks like:



Priceless, as always. For those of you who are still keeping count, this makes for roughly three months of continual anti-Danish outrage in Pakistan.

Don't they have anything more constructive to do with their time over there?

If you're in the mood for some excellent Rage Runners-Up, be sure to keep reading beyond the fold! Continue reading »

A handful of people on the liberal side of the blogosphere are in an uproar over the background of this photograph, taken of President Bush and Pope Benedict XVI by Ron Edwards/AP.

What the heck was going on? How did that Confederate flag get there? The South lost the Civil War and that flag is an egregious symbol for African Americans. Can anyone in the Bush administration explain this? No, it is not awesome, Dubya, it's insensitive and wrong.

Fortunately for Kaz, no explanation is necessary at all. If you look very carefully at the picture, you'll notice that the "Confederate" flag pictured has a field of blue below it (right underneath President Bush's hand), and that there's a small portion of red visible in the lower right-hand quarter.

Ring any bells?

No?

Okay, here's another hint: The flag of Illinois Indiana [Ed.: Oof, that hurts the team! Thanks for the correction, Sean M.!] is right next to the Pope. Now, seeing that there's a State flag next to him, what do you suppose the odds are that the flag behind Mr. President is also a State flag.

I'd say the odds are darned good.

Alas, once again we have the pleasure of showing that the whole world is not a conspiracy.

It concerns me to see pictures like this in the aftermath of the death of Reuters videographer Fadel Shana. It's one thing to pay respects to a comrade, that's obviously understandable.

It's the presence of the ginormous propaganda posters in the background that is a bit unsettling, at least to me.

Was this man a journalist, holding every side of a given issue to equal critique, aiming to bring the truth to discussion of modern events?

Or was he an activist, interested in promoting and supporting a very specific side of the conflict? A propagandist, if you will, bringing one very biased point of view to his coverage of news events on the ground?

Because, when I see propaganda posters like those posted in the picture above, I immediately think of the latter. Without question.

But hey, what are knee-jerk reactionaries for if their knees don't jerk on occasion?

To be charitable, I'll throw this one into "Human Shields" for now.

(Oh yeah, one wonders how the copyright on the propaganda posters would work, considering the photo was published on the Reuters wire. Who is "borrowing" from whom here, anyway?)

Welcome, Spectator readers and fellow Melanie Phillips fans!

For more information about the references she makes here, please see my followup article. And, if you like what you see here, feel free to subscribe to my feed—I'd love to hear what you think of the craziness that goes on over on this silly website. And if you ever see anything else that looks odd, be sure to let me know about it. We love covering photojournalism over here. One frame at a time!

Final Update on Tank Round: The mystery of the fired round is solved, courtesy "Faux" News?

I'm not sure what my Lightstalking friends are going to think about that little twist, but this is pretty convincing evidence.

I still think the questions regarding what he was doing there and what exactly the IDF was firing at need to be addressed, but this definitely seems to answer any controversy surrounding the circumstances of his death, as the other videos answered the controversy surrounding the "strange" sequence of the wire photos.

As always, I'd love to hear what you think.

Interjection: I think the question that forest asks of our Lightstalkers is important enough to highlight here. He asks, to wit:—

The discussion at Lightstalkers is pretty interesting. I wonder if there could ever be a situation where some of those people would consider that a journalist might have been a bit too chummy with terrorists? Or may actually be a terrorist armed with a camera instead of a gun? I think it's a mindset where advocacy journalism is accepted in place of old fashioned journalistic standards of impartiality.

If they want to advocate, they should get out of professional journalism and start a blog or something.

The highlighted portion is particularly interesting. After all, if professional journalists "embed" themselves with terrorist forces that in the best cases wear no formal uniform—and in the worst, play "dress up"—should we really be surprised if they are eventually mistaken as being a terrorist? Continue reading »

One man, three wire agencies. (Reuters even cropped the photo for maximum "impact." Whatever that means. Who knows? Maybe they were just trying to take a known terrorist out of the background... )

Seriously, this stuff never gets old for me.

Bonus: The facial expression in this picture? Priceless.

Be sure to click the links, while you still can. Continue reading »

The wire services are afloat in pictures of the stereotypical Palestinian "youths" (i.e., what are in most cases 25-year-old men who look suspiciously like "militants"), hurling stones and other random objects at Israeli police forces.

As many times as this exact picture has been taken, it's amazing that someone at the editorial desk still thinks it's news.

AP-Friendly Roundup: youths, youths, youths, youths, youths, youths, youths, youths, youths, youths, youths.

I have to admit—it's a pretty darn accurate way to describe people like me. From the picture, the sign reads:

Five Years AMERICAN Imperealist Possession on
IRAQ is a Humiliation of Huminity & Mankind

You'd better keep your huminity safe from we dastardly imperealists!

Update: The Tanveer brothers are at it again. One of the two wire services involved here is getting ripped off. I'll let y'all figure out which one I think it is—though, for the record, Khalid does seem to be the better photographer of the two. Assuming there really are two of 'em.