- Banned
- #1
DadsDream
Dreaming of a SAINTS Super Bowl!
Offline
Photographer Bruno Stevens took pictures of an abandoned Lebanese army base afire during Isreal's invasion. He dutifully sent in captions explaining that either an Isreali airstrike or a misfired Hezbollah rocket set the place on fire.
A week later, Time Magazine carried one of the pictures with this caption:
“The wreckage of a downed Israeli jet that was targeting Hizballah trucks billows smoke behind a Hizbollah gunman in Kfar Chima, near Beirut. Jet fuel set the surrounding area ablaze.”
One of the pictures also ran in U.S. News & World Report, again with a caption saying Hizbollah had shot down an Isreali jet.
Stevens is upset. Since the photo has been called into question, the wire services are now trying to spin the story that it wasn't a downed Isreali jet after all, but that Isreal had indiscriminantly fired on a civilian target!
STEVENS: "This caption clearly says that there is no proof that an Israeli jet had been shot down and that the objective was indeed to destroy a legitimate military target. ...A week later TIME published this image shot at the same time as the first: They choose to caption it this way (I had NO control in this matter), they HAD my original caption."
I can understand the wire services getting their wires crossed. I can't understand them trying to spin it yet another way after their "mistake" has been caught by the guy who took the pictures.
A week later, Time Magazine carried one of the pictures with this caption:
“The wreckage of a downed Israeli jet that was targeting Hizballah trucks billows smoke behind a Hizbollah gunman in Kfar Chima, near Beirut. Jet fuel set the surrounding area ablaze.”
One of the pictures also ran in U.S. News & World Report, again with a caption saying Hizbollah had shot down an Isreali jet.
Stevens is upset. Since the photo has been called into question, the wire services are now trying to spin the story that it wasn't a downed Isreali jet after all, but that Isreal had indiscriminantly fired on a civilian target!
STEVENS: "This caption clearly says that there is no proof that an Israeli jet had been shot down and that the objective was indeed to destroy a legitimate military target. ...A week later TIME published this image shot at the same time as the first: They choose to caption it this way (I had NO control in this matter), they HAD my original caption."
I can understand the wire services getting their wires crossed. I can't understand them trying to spin it yet another way after their "mistake" has been caught by the guy who took the pictures.