Smoke Signals Photo Removed by Reuters

Reuters pulled the photo based on evidence presented by Charles at LGF and others who believed that various aspects of that photo were doctored by photo manipulation tools. My own coverage of this is here.

I'd like to see more than just a withdrawal of the photo, but an investigation into how Reuters could run that photo without noticing obvious flaws. The photographer should also be made available to answer questions as to what he did.

This is what Reuters had to say:

In the message, Reuters said that "photo editing software was improperly used on this image. A corrected version will immediately follow this advisory. We are sorry for any inconvience."

Are you kidding me? We're sorry for the inconvenience? That's not an inconvenience. It's actively engaging in propaganda for terrorists. How is Reuters able to get an uncorrected version of this photo? Is the original coming from the photographer or someone within Reuters? That's an important question and would go a long way to knowing who is responsible for making such blatant changes.

UPDATE:
Added link to Charles' post at LGF above. Also, there are some questions about the corrected version of the photo that Reuters claims as the original. As I stated at LGF, I saw the corrected photo and can't tell right away if it's edited or not. One possibility is that Reuters may have gone into the bogus photo and started removing layers of edit, but didn't remove them all. Maybe Hajj provided an incompletely scrubbed photo. Who knows?

I think an investigation to know who was responsible for this mess is a prudent step. Question Hajj and the editors at Reuters to figure out who knew or should have known this was a mess.

If Hajj submitted the photoshopped jobs, he should be fired and have his other works scrutinized for other signs of editing. If he submitted a clean photo, then it was someone at Reuters. That would be a bigger problem.

And someone at Reuters sent Charles a death threat because he exposed Reuters' bogus photo. Now, that's professionalism. Reuters has suspended the person who sent the death threat. Sounds to me like Reuters has a bigger problem than simply photo editing images coming into its service.

UPDATE:
While the blatant photo was pulled by Reuters, they're still posting a doctored version at Yahoo News.

UPDATE:
Hot Air has updates on the story. Memeorandum has a full scale blogswarm assault on Reuters photo editing fiasco chronicled.

Ed Morrissey sees the media continuing its double standards beyond the shameful Reuters photo editing mess, and wonders where Kofi Annan is to denounce Hizbullah for injuring three Chinese UNIFIL observers in an attack on a UNIFIL position.

Others laying the smackdown on Reuters: Stop the ACLU, Jeff Goldstein, Outside the Beltway, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

UPDATE:
Rusty at the Jawa Report notes some other questionable photos from Adnan Hajj. Reuters suspended Hajj. What does it take to fire someone over there anyways? EU Referendum, who has been going after the truth about the photos in Qana, wonders where Reuters' editorial policy enforcement bureau has been considering the stream of questionable photos coming out of Lebanon. Still others swarming around the Reuters fiasco: Flopping Aces and AJ Strata.

Just for posterity's sake, here' Reuters' response in visual form:


UPDATE:
Don Surber makes what should have been an obvious observation. Reuters killed the photo, but how exactly do you recall the photo from being run in all those newspapers that published it? Good question. Real good question.

Corrected the Reuters disciplinary action against employee who sent death threats to Charles. It was a separate and distinct incident.

Others blogging: Mark My Words, Newsbusters, Gates of Vienna, Soccer Dad, Jay Currie, Michelle Malkin, Sister Toldjah, and Jeff Jarvis.

And while I'm on the subject of noting other bloggers who are busy posting this information, isn't anyone the slightest bit curious as to where the Lefty bloggers are on commenting about the Reuters posting bogus photos? The silence is deafening. Don't they think making sure that the media reports coming from the Middle East are accurate, or do they only look for the stories that make the US or Israel look especially bad before commenting?

UPDATE:
Reuters has told Adnan Hajj that it will no longer accept any of his photos for publication. Hajj denies any wrongdoing.

"The photographer has denied deliberately attempting to manipulate the image, saying that he was trying to remove dust marks and that he made mistakes due to the bad lighting conditions he was working under," said Moira Whittle, the head of public relations for Reuters.

"This represents a serious breach of Reuters' standards and we shall not be accepting or using pictures taken by him," Whittle said in a statement issued in London.

Hajj worked for Reuters as a non-staff freelance, or contributing photographer, from 1993 until 2003 and again since April 2005.

He was among several photographers from the main international news agencies whose images of a dead child being held up by a rescuer in the village of Qana, south Lebanon, after an Israeli air strike on July 30 have been challenged by blogs critical of the mainstream media's coverage of the Middle East conflict.

Reuters and other news organizations reviewed those images and have all rejected allegations that the photographs were staged.

Well, maybe now they'll go back and reevaluate those earlier denials in light of the current situation. Will any of the other wire reports do the same and deny him publication? Or, will Arab media provide an outlet for his photos without any questions asked? Who knows.

UPDATE:
Dem Bloggers picked up the Reuters photo mess (Reutergate?) story and I have to give 'em props for noting what's important:

We need objective journalism from sources such as Reuters. When they fail in being objective I'm glad that the blogosphere is there to keep them honest, even if this time it came from a source I rarely agree with.

Technorati: beirut, photoshop, adnan hajj, smoke, photo manipulation, reuters.