He was attempting to make the already terrible seem worse and regardless off your experience, as an Art Director myself who has worked for numerous National titles I’ve never met a Picture Editor worth their salt who wouldn’t have caught this, unless that is they had an editorial agenda it meshed with.

Don’t always assume something has to be so blatant as to have an affect.

Show me some examples of this “warm and fuzzy” thing you’re talking about. Of course, I don’t see why we should have an inherent “respect” for any foreign nation.

Stevil, it should also be noted that the 12 people killed at Kfar Giladi, near Kiryat Shmona, were soldiers in trucks full of ammunition and equipment preparing to enter Lebanon. They were a military target, not civilians.

You guys can keep talking about how the doctored picture is an example of bias, but none of you are explaining how editing a photo—but not changing the reality it shows—is bias at all. He didn’t take a normal building and airbrush bombholes and create smoke billowing from it when none was there. His crappy editing didn’t alter the reality it depicted before the editing.

As a photographer, I frequently (almost always) adjust the contrast of almost every photo I use for anything—nobody uses a raw photo for professional use, the levels are never correct.

I’d say that the fact that the photo is so OBVIOUSLY altered is proof that the photo editor wasn’t paying attention, not that he was. You’re wondering how he could have not caught that mistake because it was so obvious, so he must have let it through on purpose. It’s much more plausible that he wasn’t paying attention and didn’t notice it, which is why he let it through.

Of course, the GOP’s recent airbrushing of a subtle Hitler mustache on Howard Dean (since pulled and replaced) is an example of a deliberate photo manipulation intended to alter reality. But this example of the smoke in Hajj and DeWine’s photos is not something that people should be upset about—those buildings were destroyed.

There is certainly plenty of death and destruction in the north, it may not be on the level you and Hezbollah want to see but none-the-less it’s there.

As for Hajjs’ pictures; it’s just a obvious example of the pervading anti-Israeli media bias, the fact that a picture editor didn’t catch it is BS and goes to show that a great deal of media coming out of this War cannot be trusted and relied upon as impartial or even factual.

Try and refute this simple concept Guav and I will laugh.

Screw it… I am going to laugh regardless

It was foolish to do, but since the WTC actually was on fire, it doesn’t really matter—it was not depicting anything that didn’t actually happen. Same with this picture.

As far as why you don’t see pictures of the warzone in Israel that look like the ones from Lebanon, that’s because there is no “warzone” in Israel that looks anything like southern Lebanon—not even close.

Katyushas are small rockets, they basically just punch a hole in whatever they hit, they don’t level buildings and leave huge craters, they don’t knock down bridges.

The heaviest hit town in northern Israel, Kiryat Shmona, has been hit by more than 700 katyushas since July 12, and there has not been a single fatality in Kiryat Shmona.

You don’t see pictures of Israel that look like Lebanon because Israel simply does not look like Lebanon.

But his crap job didn’t distort the reality, which is that bombs hit the building, and smoke was billowing from the building.

What “truth” did the doctored picture depict that the original photo doesn’t?