Samfund og medier

Jeg hører – jeg glemmer
Jeg ser – jeg husker
Jeg handler – jeg forstår
Kongfutse

Al kontakt er kommunikation. Jordmoderen er den første et nyt menneske møder. Moren og faren er de næste, og de er helt afhængige af, at barnet allerede fra den første dag er i stand til at kommunikere.
Det er vores evne til at kommunikere og siden til at lære at tale og skrive, der adskiller os fra alle andre levende væsener i dyre- og planteriget.

Selvom vi allesammen kan kommunikere – så er der nogen, der gør det meget bedre end de fleste – det er folk der på forskellig måde har uddannet sig som professionelle kommentatorer. Fx journalister, skuespillere, politikere, reklamefolk, forfattere, TV værter og mange andre.

SpindelV2lille
De sociale medier

 

drmediekonvergens2org
Mediekonvergens

 

Journalistisk fusk


latimesbeskaaretFotografen havde i Photoshop sat to billeder sammen til et tredje foto, som avisen så offentliggjorde på sin forside.Los Angeles Times – en meget respekteret amerikansk avis – offentliggjorde mandag den 31. marts 2003 et elektronisk manipuleret billede fra krigen i Irak.

Da det blev opdaget blev fotografen Brian Walski øjeblikkelig fyret, fordi L.A. Times’ billedpolitik forbyder enhver ændring af nyhedsfotografier.

Først den 2. april langt nede på hjemmesiden under ”Editor’s note” og i den trykte udgave fortæller L.A. Times kort om det manipulerede fotografi.

På websiden Poynter.org er der en længere artikel om sagen og en flash-animering (findes ikke mere) der viser hvordan billedet er blevet manipuleret. Siden viser også, hvordan billedet blev brugt i avisen.

Trods mange henvendelser har Los Angeles Times ikke ønsket at give tilladelse til, at billedet bliver vist på dette websted, selvom det allerede ligger på nettet.

Tak til Kenneth Irby og Poynter.com for tilladelse til at gengive kilderne til denne sag
.

Skærmbillede 2012-04-13 kl. 22.40.52

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Analysing the pictures
Let us now take a look at the two original photographs and relate them to the final composite.It appears Brian Walski took the two following photographs only moments apart:In the first photo we can clearly recognise the Iraqi man standing in the center with his child. Also, the crowd on the right hand side of the photograph are the same as in the composite. In fact, we can see that all elements of the picture on the right hand side of the soldier have been preserved in the final product. However, in this photograph the soldier is immobile, with his hand down and looks more relaxed. He appears to be looking at the man with the child. No threatening behaviour is visible and the people look reasonably calm. We can also notice in this picture that the area on the soldierʼs left is different from the composite: the civilians are not the same and a military tank is visible. This clearly shows that the British military is controlling the area.The second photo on the other hand shows the soldier in the dynamic stance weʼve seen him in in the published picture. A man sitting down on the right seems concerned by something as heʼs pointing in the direction the soldier has his back turned to. Most civilians seem to be looking in that general direction. The standing Iraqi man is this time further in the background and is looking away from the soldier. There is no direct connection between the two men. The area on the left of the soldier is the same as in the composite photograph, no tank is visible.We can conclude that the controversial picture was composed of the right hand part of the first photo and the left hand part (including the soldier) of the second photo. Each part has been slightly cropped and augmented, to facilitate the merging and create a more dramatic picture. The sky seems to be a mixture of both photographs.We donʼt know which photo was taken first, but it appears more likely that it was photo 2 as the man with the child is standing behind a group of people, further back than in photo 1 (in which he seems to be walking towards the soldier).Considering the work involved in creating this composite, we can assume that the effect was intentional and thought through by photographer Brian Walski.What was his reason for doing so? Under what circumstances was he working? What was the desired effect?