And here we thought everyone in the media was falling all over themselves to point out how Karl Rove is the best thing to happen to cable news since Anderson Cooper’s baby blues. But there remains some controversy about Fox News hiring the former White House strategist. Something about Rove’s refusal to testify before Congress? Scandal!
Oh, but lest you think that Chris Wallace defending Rove was the most noteworthy part of yesterday’s Fox News Q&A at the Television Critics Association annual event, there’s this: The network is finally saying it regrets those New York Times Photoshop illustrations. Backtrack! CONTINUED »
This summer’s Photoshop Media Wars has, so far, gone like this:
• In the beginning of the month, Fox News’ Fox & Friends Photoshopped pictures of New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg and editor Steven Reddicliffe after their late June “hit job” piece on FNC, which described how CNN and MSNBC were closing the ratings gap. Link
• Upset over the criticism aimed at FNC — you know, because there was no mention that the photos were altered — Bill O’Reilly last week called out the Times for its own Photoshopping of him back when it reviewed his book. Link
• Vanity Fair decided to get in on the fun, yesterday releasing its own gallery of Fox News personalities Photoshopped all caricature-y. Link
And now, Fox News adds the fourth chapter: Going after Graydon Carter with the “Photoshopped” photo you see here. CONTINUED »
This photo, released by Sepah News, the media arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, and distributed by Agence France-Presse, hit the front pages of a slew of newspapers across the country, including the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune, as part of a report about the country’s controversial missile testing. Only problem? It was likely a fake. Or at least a, ahem, “photo illustration.” Keen eyes spotted an extra missile — that second one from the right — that appears to have been Photoshopped into the pic. Not that this would be the first time Iran has been fingered for employing digital tricks in its official pix. So why’d they Photoshop this particular photo? CONTINUED »
Madonna on Out. Jennifer Aniston on Redbook. Kelly Clarkson on Elle. All of these are shining examples of magazines Photoshopping their cover subjects to within a inch of reality. Pop superstars replaced with alien lifeforms. Body parts swapped in and out. Arm, torso, and ass fat replaced with white space.
Now, Elle is adding Mariah Carey to the esteemed list of cartoons. CONTINUED »
It turns out this photo of Tiger Woods in the Washington Post, which Photoshop Disasters fingered for being a doctored image, is actually not a photo editor’s bungled work. In fact, it’s an original image from Getty, and just one example of what can happen when a telephoto lens is placed in the hands of an oblivious photographer. The original image is here.
Megacorp Unileaver is fighting back against claims that its ads for Dove’s “Real Beauty” campaign were retouched, despite what professional photo retoucher Pascal Dangin told The New Yorker. They’re in full-court defense mode, which means, of course, they’re issuing a statement with their side of things. It reads in part: “There was an understanding between Dove and Ms Leibovitz that the photos would not be retouched - the only actions taken were the removal of dust from the film and minor color correction.” Not cellulite, freckles, fat rolls, hair stubble, vericose veins, or oily skin. CONTINUED »
Forget for a moment that Dove’s entire “Real Beauty” initiative was a campaign that played off ladies’ insecurities under the guise of celebrating women of all shapes and sizes.
Now there’s new evidence the skincare company was taking customers for a ride: The photos of the “real” women in the advertisements were actually airbrushed to hell. CONTINUED »
Who is this attractive young woman on the left? CONTINUED »
The Company American Bistro restaurant, at the Luxor hotel-casino in Las Vegas, which just opened last month after shuttering for a “rebranding,” is the plaything of celebrity investors like Nick Lahey, Nicky Hilton, and Wilmer Valerrama. It’s run by Pure Management Group, the same outfit that runs hotspots Pure and LAX, and is the middle of an IRS audit over allegations of undisclosed tips.
So perhaps it’s those financial woes which can explain this advertisement for the eatery?
(Click for larger version) CONTINUED »
Might the American Society of Magazine Editors place a ban on Photoshopping cover photos?
HAHAHAHAHA! No! That’s like saying, “Hey, Americans would love to see Cam Diaz’s acne flair-up and Fergie’s butta face all in the name of transparency,” and let’s not kid ourselves about how unrealistic those prospects are. But of course the Cindi Leive-led American mag org is considering having a panel discussion to address the issue, at least to keep up appearances with the Periodical Publishers Association, the U.K.’s magazine trade association, which plans to also talk things out.
But perhaps they should address the issue of magazines Photoshopping covergirls to make them look fatter? CONTINUED »
Shockingly, it looks like the ad agency behind Eva Longoria’s new BeBe ad campaign didn’t have to whip out the Photoshop airbrush as much usual.
CONTINUED »
We have some unfortunate news to report: It appears the four ladies of Sex and the City may have, possibly, resorted to airbrushing to appear younger in the movie’s promotional stills. When will the Photoshop madness end?! [Daily Mail]
Parents magazine may have called out Jennifer Lopez’s People spread for showcasing her death trap of a nursery, but who’s going to call out Parenting magazine for cutting off a baby’s legs? [PSD]
Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible.
So begins Janet Malcolm’s case study of journalistic betrayal, The Journalist and The Murderer. Fortunately, we are too full of ourselves to notice. Besides most “real” journalists would say that what we do isn’t morally indefensible in that sense anyway.
Malcolm never wrote about art editors, but in the age of photoshop there’s definitely material for an Adobe expose.
Like journalists, their job is complicated by their conflicting desires to sell magazines and be honest. Sure a Q&A will read better with heavy editing and Glamour might sell more covers with a thinner America Ferrera, but that doesn’t mean doing those things is right. And does the public deserve some of the blame for subconsciously wanting an Andy Roddick with bigger arms?
Well, these issues are too weighty for a Friday, but one thing is for sure: if you’re going to do touch ups, there’s no point in lying about which direction you’re going in.
Self art director Petra Kobayashi claims, “We retouch to make the models look bigger, healthier.”
Wow, their touchups are so subtle we barely noticed how fat the model above looks.
The art director of Glamour has us stumped.
We get that thin is in and everything, but why would you thin out America Ferrera? Her whole career, from Real Women Have Curves to Ugly Betty is based on her not being skinny. A major plot of point of The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants was the size of her ass. If the Men’s Fitness editor was called out for adding muscle to a professional athlete, don’t you think that people would be able to tell that pounds were digitally shaved off of America Ferrera?
It seems impossible, but this cover is not even worthy of a feature about 39 sexy things to do with hair.
Editorial Director
