Alleged editorial chats published by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein suggest the paper tried to limit the publication of photos of the accused shooter.
“We’ve had Mangione leading the site overnight (and the pic is very strong), but as more details have emerged, his profile matches one of a mass shooter more closely than anything else (mental health questions, shocking crime, manifesto, etc. etc.),” the photo editor said in the messages. “The news value and public service of showing his face are diminishing, compared with concerns of amplifying the crime and inspiring others — something we avoid with mass shooters in particular.”
As a research physicist from MIT, Stuart Sevier learned a lot about reality, technology, and perhaps most importantly, the perception of reality. He veered off his hardcore academic track to pursue the concept of reality from a more engineering-based perspective, ultimately founding Atom Images and working with a talented team to build the Atom H1, a tool built for photographers to capture trusted, authentic images in a world where the line between real and fake is becoming blurrier by the day.
The response to the podcast was immediate — so fast that it isn’t even possible that a majority of those who left comments and hit the dislike button could have listened to the whole podcast. Simply for setting foot in Adobe’s building, we were called shills as the hate flowed in. It feels very much like a “shoot the messenger” situation — one I’ve been in before, but that doesn’t make it any easier to come to terms with.
Over the past few weeks, we’ve compiled the questions you want Adobe to answer related to its push into AI, recent controversies, and the state of photography in general. We had a chance to sit down with Maria Yap, Adobe’s Vice President of Digital Imaging, to give the company a chance to respond.
The scientists say that when a camera operator appears on screen, it “detracts from critical game moments” and could lead to “revenue losses for broadcasters because of viewer dissatisfaction.”
BNN Breaking had millions of readers, an international team of journalists and a publishing deal with Microsoft. But it was full of error-ridden content.
During the two years that BNN was active, it had the veneer of a legitimate news service, claiming a worldwide roster of “seasoned” journalists and 10 million monthly visitors, surpassing the The Chicago Tribune’s self-reported audience. Prominent news organizations like The Washington Post, Politico and The Guardian linked to BNN’s stories. Google News often surfaced them, too.
One person who is not bothered by the winning photo is Shani Louk’s father, Nissim. He told Ynet News that it’s good that the image of his deceased daughter won the prize because it is “one of the most important photos in the last 50 years.”
“At closer inspection it appears that the source has manipulated this image,” wrote the AP in a so-called kill notification. AFP cited an “editorial issue,” and said that the photo “may no longer be used in any manner.” News outlets that had run the photograph, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, subsequently took it down.
Today we chat with A. D. Coleman, photography critic and historian, about the history, legacy and controversy of the famous Robert Capa. Known for his groundbreaking photography of the D-Day invasion in 1944
The huge list includes thousands of artists’ names; among them are scores of photographers — both living and dead — whose styles Midjourney apparently wanted to copy so that users of its AI image generator could make AI pictures in the style of that photographer.
Even as a camera gives you considerable power — you literally get to shape how other people will be seen, it is very difficult for many photographers to be mindful of it, in particular when being confronted with the power a father figure seems to exert (even if in reality that power might have now waned if not outright disappeared).
This drives us to the core issue: what is that trust’s value? Does a photograph that contains that certificate have more value than one that doesn’t? And if so, how much more?
In a series of three essays published in 1991, the philosopher Jean Baudrillard argued that the Gulf War, which ended up with more than a hundred thousand dead Iraqis, had not really taken place. In his inimitable fashion, his argument was filled with internal contradictions, annoying trolling (Baudrillard had initially written that the Gulf War would never actually happen, which, of course, it did), and some pockets of real clarity. His ultimate argument was that what had taken place wasn’t so much a war but a one-sided aerial slaughter that was scrubbed clean through intensive media control. What people in the West saw were so-called live feeds of missiles and aerial assaults fuelled by new forms of technology, whether the Patriot missile or the stealth bomber. The war was communicated to us almost like an advertisement for a new car—here are all the new features, and here are the salesmen in the form of generals or foreign-policy experts paraded on cable news. We did not see slain enemy combatants, destroyed civilian homes.
The rise of AI imagery is of real concern to public discourse: The actress Rosie O’Donnell shared this AI image from TikTok of a Palestinian mother dragging her children and belongings down a rubble-strewn road. She believed it was real stating that it was not an AI image — but she later deleted the post.
The WPP’s Open Format category had allowed submissions of images partially created with a photo-editing tool known as generative fill, which automatically creates or removes elements in a photograph, sometimes through a text prompt.
Sony’s new in-camera solution creates a digital signature at the time of capture, and unlike Leica’s M11-P, Sony’s answer to the “fake news” problem does not require specialized hardware inside its cameras. Existing cameras, like the Sony a1 and a7S III will support in-camera signature and C2PA authentication alongside the upcoming Sony a9 III, which is slated to be a compelling new camera for many photojournalists.
Gruesome photographs of Palestinian children killed in rocket strikes and Israeli infants murdered by terrorists. Digitally doctored images that whip around social media before they can be verified. Accusations — since rejected by multiple news outlets — that photojournalists had advance knowledge of the Hamas surprise attack on Oct. 7.
Today, The Washington Post went further than any mainstream news organization has ever gone before in showing the brutality and devastation of something that plagues this nation: mass shootings.
I have lived through the move from paste-up to digital design, saw print reduced to almost nothing, led a photo team that was forced to pivot to video and helped design many apps that were supposed to save us all. None of those changes moved at the speed of generative AI.
