Treachery! You would have thought the producers over at FNC would have learned their lesson after Fox and Friends had that little Photoshop mishap with Times writer Jacques Steinberg and editor Steven Reddicliffe, but apparently not…according to the watchdog group Think Progress, who claim that in this video, O'Reilly doctors a photo of NBC chief Jeff Zucker to make his chrome-dome look more alien like.
And of course, when they say "Bill O'Reilly" they mean "producers at Fox and some interns using Adobe," because it's really doubtful that Billy-boy knows how to use Photoshop, or would be inclined to.
However, controversy…er…more controversy arises when other watchdog blogs point out that Think Progress' captured still of Jeff Zucker's head isn't the same one used in the telecast.
A comparison, after the jump.
CONTINUED »
Slightly important controversy erupted this week when da blog scene started questioning the authenticity of Kirsten Dunst's pearly whites on the cover of Harper Bazaar's October issue. Were they or weren't they (photoshopped)? Kirsten has always been a proud advocate of her snaggletooth, so Harper's decision to artificially whiten/straighten Dunst's teeth could presumably be seen as another example of fashion magazines hiding human flaws on their models and setting unrealistic expectations for women to…**snooze**
Harper's Bazaar claims it didn't artificially fix Dunst's smile, so maybe the girl just got herself some Crest whitening gel. Whatever.
At any rate, it's marginally more interesting than wondering who's gotten a boob lift, so let's look at the photo evidence:
CONTINUED »
Yesterday the story was all about Jill Greenberg and her nutty liberally-biased photography (pictured right) that caused a scandal over at The Atlantic after she snapped some less than flattering pictures of McCain for the magazine's cover, then bragged on her blog about pulling the wool over David Bradley's eyes. Displeased, Jill's agency Vaugn Hannigan supposed axed her after news of the cover (as well as the personal Photoshops of the Arizona senator she posted on her website) hit. Untrue, says Jill, who claims it was she who quit the agency, because they did not support her as an "artist."
Against our own will, we tend to to side with the photographer on this one, if only because the news of her ouster came from such an objective source: CONTINUED »
If there are two truths we know to be certain in this world, they are: 1) Consumers are gullible and will buy anything that promises to better their lives immediately; and 2) Photoshop is not a tool for the inexperienced. Thus, a gallery of advertisements offering before-and-after results that are 1) More impressive than anything that smiling Enzyte guy promised; and 2) A lesson in how not to use Photoshop. More below. CONTINUED »
What's worse: Having your likeness used without consent to promote flaring panty hose in China? Or having your likeness used without consent to promote flaring panty hose in China with a bad Photoshop job?
Click for a larger shot: CONTINUED »
"In that cover photo, it looks like Vivienne Marcheline — clearly the Ashley half of this Olsen-like combo — is sporting a giant grin. She may even be laughing. Hold on. These babies are purported to be a mere 3 weeks old! Parenting magazine says that babies don't smile from exterior stimulation until two to four months — even if said exterior stimulation is the most beautiful pair of humans in the entire world." [Daily Intel]
Know who's getting in the way of Jessica Simpson remaking herself as a country star? Elle. You might think the magazine's styling her in tight jeans, a plaid shirt, and a cowboy belt buckle — all, likely, insisted upon by daddy Joe — is part of her transformation away from dumb blonde "pop star." And it tried to be. But the Photoshop mess is getting in the way. Though her head may be properly placed on her body — Elle recently had this problem with Mariah Carey — there is something plainly wrong with the bend of her hips and the positioning of her legs, not to mention the torso from the miniatures shop. Ms. Simpson's blonde locks aren't the only artificial things on this magazine.
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]
Editorial Director
