Prove it? With doctoring it's clear, but with cropping it's dubious.the fact is that they changed the image in order to be deceitful, "doctoring" or not
I do see the difference. I agree there is a difference.Ugh whatever, carry on, clearly you don't see a difference between doctoring and cropping.
checking if he was actually jewish maybe?Jock Strap?
Better Question-WTF were you doing looking at his crouch?
not really, no.the fact is that they changed the image in order to be deceitful, "doctoring" or not
We don't really know if it was intentional or not. That's why its worth having a thread about.not really, no.
It's a troll having a go at Reuters based on almost nothing. Seems to me that they focused in on where the action was in that photo: on the IDF retards hilarious facial expression.We don't really know if it was intentional or not. That's why its worth having a thread about.
Indeed. I very much doubt that. What possible political agenda could Reuters have? What benefit would it serve?Can anyone provide examples of other photos cropped or 'doctored' by Reuters that would give weight to such a claim?
Adnan Hajj photographs controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaWe don't really know if it was intentional or not. That's why its worth having a thread about.
Can anyone provide examples of other photos cropped or 'doctored' by Reuters that would give weight to such a claim?