# Can the Democrats sink any lower? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 9, 2008, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200 "2008-10-09T18:03:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/61 "2008-10-10T02:17:06Z")
> [@j666](#): > > As a consumer, I disagree about removing distracting elements in the background, in theory. That Kent State ‘doctored’ photograph is worth the sin of removing the fence post. (I would say the picture would be ineligible for any award, though.) Maybe as a consumer you don’t care, but as a journalist it is deeply troubling. It undermines our credibility; it’s already hard enough, sometimes, to convince people a photo _isn’t_ doctored due to computer image editing programs. And where does one draw the line? If it’s okay to remove a fencepost, is it okay to remove a piece of trash? An distracting person who isn’t adding anything to the image? Is it okay to composite two photos, as the one photographer did in the link I gave before, to create a third, more powerful image, that really isn’t _that_ far away from the truth? That guy got fire, and rightfully so. You don’t composite images and call it a news photo. You don’t move elements of your environment around. You cannot, say, go to an earthquake site with rubble and move a child’s stuffed animal from, say, this location to this other location because it looks better. You’re not there to create photos. You’re there to take them. As journalists, we must have the public’s trust to do our job effectively. Altering photos in any way erodes this trust. As a photojournalist, if you have a distracting background, your job is to find a way around it. Move, change your angle, whatever, but do not Photoshop it out. If a great moment happens, as in the Kent State photo, and you have a distracting element in the background, tough shit. You leave it in. Your job is to record reality as faithfully as possible. Obviously, you can get into philosophical arguments about how lens selection, angle selection, etc., can subtly alter perceptions and interpretations of “reality,” but directly changing the content of your photo in post-production is, and has always been, a big no-no. ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/62 "2008-10-10T02:34:05Z")
I just watched a clip from Faux News (via Perez) where they had some Republican chick having a fit about the cover and blah blah and unflattering to women and blah blah and you must retouch blah blah — OK. Got it. So I go to _Newsweek_’s website, to get a better look at this picture (the beotches on Faux kept saying "You can’t see on TV how awful this photograph is) and I read the **headline for the article** which is: > [@](#): > > The Palin Problem > > _Yes, she won the debate by not imploding. But governing requires knowledge, and mindless populism is just that—mindless._ So — that part _isn’t_ unflattering? You can call a beotch stooopid, but hey, making her ugly, that just ain’t cool. How bizarre. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/63 "2008-10-10T04:24:44Z")
Beauty is only skin-deep, stupid goes right down to the bone. ---
**Author:** ![panamajack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/47e85d/32.png) [@panamajack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panamajack)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/64 "2008-10-10T04:29:33Z")
If you get your hands on the dead tree version of Newsweek, check this out: Right inside the cover (on the back of Palin’s face) is a half-face chiaroscuro picture of Christian Slater, and on the opposte page in big type is the name of his new show, “My Own Worst Enemy”. The similarity is at least amusing (or another affront to decent folks). I couldn’t see the difference in the Kent State picture either (compressed to that size, the retouching looks bad enough that you can still notice something there). After some poking around I found the answer, but also learned that Vecchio was 14 in the shot. She looks … old for her age. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/65 "2008-10-10T09:48:50Z")
> [@fessie](#): > > I just watched a clip from Faux News (via Perez) where they had some Republican chick having a fit about the cover and blah blah and unflattering to women and blah blah and you must retouch blah blah — OK. Got it. > > So I go to _Newsweek_’s website, to get a better look at this picture (the beotches on Faux kept saying "You can’t see on TV how awful this photograph is) and I read the **headline for the article** which is: > > So — that part _isn’t_ unflattering? > > You can call a beotch stooopid, but hey, making her ugly, that just ain’t cool. > How bizarre. The Faux News shill is undoubtedly making the correct assumption: that Faux News watchers will never read the article, just look at the cover. ---
**Author:** ![Sublight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Sublight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sublight)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/66 "2008-10-10T10:21:58Z")
> [@j666](#): > > As for Palin? She’s cute as a bug, in every photo I’ve seen. I actually agree with you on this. Literally. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/67 "2008-10-10T16:21:24Z")
Is a wood tick a bug? Or is it a feature? ---
**Author:** ![UnwrittenNocturne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/6de8d8/32.png) [@UnwrittenNocturne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UnwrittenNocturne)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/68 "2008-10-10T16:32:07Z")
What sort of bug? I’m thinking cockroach ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/69 "2008-10-10T16:34:39Z")
Maybe that’s why she bugs me so much. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/70 "2008-10-10T16:40:10Z")
I’m still stunned by "TV Guide pastes Oprah’s head onto Ann Margaret’s body ". ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/71 "2008-10-10T16:41:28Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Maybe that’s why she bugs me so much. Indictment pending. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/72 "2008-10-10T16:43:14Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Indictment pending. And pre-ignored, no doubt. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Devil_s_Grandmother)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/73 "2008-10-10T20:52:21Z")
> [@NinjaChick](#): > > Yikes, I didn’t mean to insult anyone, nor imply that Palin is Old, nor anything else. All I meant was that she’s way out of my age bracket, and thus, any statements about her attractiveness is sort of abstract. George Clooney is also attractive for his age, but considering that he’s closer to my parent’s age than mine, I wouldn’t make any advances or sleep with him, in the unlikely event that I found myself in a position to do for. > > Well, _probably_ not, anyway. It’s ok. Age sort of flattens out as you get older. I’d do George Clooney (who is probabaly my age) or Sean Connery (who is a little older than my dad, I think. But 20 years ago I would have thought him too old). I should not have snapped at you and I’m sorry I did. The repititions of “for her age” just got to me. I’ll try to be better in the future. ---
**Author:** ![SisterCoyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@SisterCoyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SisterCoyote)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/74 "2008-10-10T22:00:39Z")
Am I the only person who _doesn’t_ see a moustache? ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/75 "2008-10-10T23:39:08Z")
No. ---
**Author:** ![UnwrittenNocturne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/6de8d8/32.png) [@UnwrittenNocturne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UnwrittenNocturne)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2008, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/76 "2008-10-10T23:56:32Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > I should not have snapped at you and I’m sorry I did. The repititions of “for her age” just got to me. I’ll try to be better in the future. It’s not her age (and I’m 40 sometime over next week, I just got lucky and married someone 15 years younger), it’s that her morality is somewhere on par with the Creature from the Black Lagoon. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2008, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/77 "2008-10-11T00:25:27Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > The fencepost was removed because, compositionally, it is distracting. It is a grievous photojournalistic sin to eliminate a districting element in the background in that manner. Were I on a newspaper, I would expect to be severely reprimanded, if not more likely outright fired, for such an ethical breach. You can argue philosophically about what is truth in photography and what is not, but manipulating photos to such a degree where you remove or add elements to a photograph is clearly out of bounds. I can’t figure why it was important or desirable to somebody to have the fencepost removed, but I will point out that the retouched version was re-published twenty-five years after the original won the Pulitzer. Not that that makes any difference, from an ethics standpoint. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2008, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/78 "2008-10-11T00:26:08Z")
> [@SisterCoyote](#): > > Am I the only person who _doesn’t_ see a moustache? > [@OttoDaFe](#): > > No. Me neither. ---
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2008, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/79 "2008-10-11T03:03:42Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > Maybe as a consumer you don’t care, but as a journalist it is deeply troubling. … And it should be, to a journalist, particularly to a photojournalist of any skill, given our current level of technology. As a consumer, I would be outraged by adding elements, moving elements, or composites, and, of course, any substantive change. I just found brushing out the fence-post and antenna completely insignificant compared to the other changes in the link. Those I found egregious. I don’t think distractions should be allowed to dilute the main point, in writing or photography. I guess the photos shouldn’t have been used, but both capture pain so well … Makes the very idea of minimizing wrinkles or pores seem at bit trivial. I would think Palin supported would praised every wrinkle shown as indicative of experience. ---
**Author:** ![NinjaChick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71c47a/32.png) [@NinjaChick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinjaChick)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2008, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200/80 "2008-10-11T03:11:14Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > It’s ok. Age sort of flattens out as you get older. I’d do George Clooney (who is probabaly my age) or Sean Connery (who is a little older than my dad, I think. But 20 years ago I would have thought him too old). > > I should not have snapped at you and I’m sorry I did. The repititions of “for her age” just got to me. I’ll try to be better in the future. No offense taken. And I think your point about age is very true: I think most people would find it rather odd if a 20something was serious in some romantic way about a 40something, but a 40something with a 60 something? Eh, sure. Though, you know, with a username like yours, the age jokes are just too easy… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-democrats-sink-any-lower/467200.md?page=5)