CBC Edition

Don't believe your eyes - fake photos have been a problem for a long time

- Natalie Stechyson

How can you know if a photo is real?

That's a question media outlets are facing with re‐ newed scrutiny after two im‐ ages released by Kensington Palace were found to have been digitally altered - the now-infamous photo of Catherine, the Princess of Wales, surrounded by her smiling children; and a 2022 image of Queen Elizabeth with her grandchild­ren and great-grandchild­ren. The former was killed by many photo agencies just hours af‐ ter they published it.

But the Royal Family is far from the only establishm­ent that hands out images to the media. Politician­s, busi‐ nesses, government­s, science agencies and the police do it regularly - just to name a few. And the royals are also far from the first to alter an offi‐ cial image.

"The issues around the trustworth­iness of pho‐ tography, photograph­y as a manipulabl­e technology, have existed from the advent of the medium," Elisabeth Sherman, the senior curator and director of exhibition­s and collection­s at the Inter‐ national Center for Pho‐ tography in New York, told CBC News's social team.

The fact that Kensington Palace's altered photos were picked up by the media - in‐ cluding CBC News - is a good reminder that the idea of handout photos is fraught and should potentiall­y be re‐ considered, says Aneurin Bosley, an assistant professor at Carleton University's school of journalism, who specialize­s in digital report‐ ing.

The debacle over Cather‐ ine's photo "is really only scratching the surface," he said.

A search for "handout" in The Associated Press photo database showed 21,519 re‐ sults on Monday, everything from images of the suspects in Friday's deadly Moscow bombing provided by Russ‐ ian authoritie­s, to those of leader Kim Jong-un provided by North Korea.

There were more than 115,000 results on the Reuters database.

Altered photos are a prob‐ lem for any reporting. But when they are used in "deep‐ er" issues, "when it goes into the politics of war or the politics of running for for election and, disinforma­tion, it's pretty scary," said Ken Light, a photojourn­alist and adjunct journalism professor at the University of Cali‐ fornia, Berkeley.

WATCH | How easy it is to use AI to alter images:

Long history

Photo tampering has a long and storied history. Even the iconic 1860 portrait of Abra‐ ham Lincoln is a stitched image of his head on another politician's body.

Other well-known exam‐ ples include the famous, pur‐ ported photo of the Loch Ness monster, first published in The Daily Mail in 1934, and later proved to be fake. In 1945, a Soviet army pho‐ tographer manipulate­d two images of Russia's victory over Germany, adding extra smoke in the background of one, and removing a second watch on the arm of a soldier in another.

There's the 1970 Kent State University massacre photo - which became a sym‐ bol of the turmoil and protests of the time - and which earned photograph­er John Paul Filo a Pulitzer Prize. But Life magazine altered it by removing a post behind the anguished bystander's head, according to The New York Times, and that version has been published and re‐ published over the years.

More recently a freelance photograph­er working for Reuters used Photoshop to add extra smoke and flares to a 2006 photo of the Iraq war. The incident prompted the wire service to tighten its editing procedures.

Light, who has been a freelance photograph­er for 50 years, has his own experi‐ ence with tampering. He took a photo of U.S. politician John Kerry at a 1971 peace rally in Long Island, N.Y. When Kerry announced he was running for president in 2004, Light uploaded his photos to an online photo database.

He says a "right wing" graphic designer then down‐ loaded the photo and added a 1972 photo of Jane Fonda, making it appear as if the two were photograph­ed to‐ gether.

"And, of course, many Re‐ publicans and folks on the right, hate Jane Fonda, Hanoi Jane, they called her. And this photo, this phony photo went viral, and people be‐ lieved it was true," he said.

The New York Times even picked it up, but ran a fol‐ lowup explaining the photo had been manipulate­d.

What's concerning to Light is how easy it is now to manipulate photos.

WATCH | Other times people thought royal pics were edited:

"Junior high school kids can do it. Many others can manipulate photos. And of course, now we have AI, which is even more danger‐ ous than the ability to do these things in Photoshop.

We begin to question what's real. What's not real? How do we know?"

Transparen­cy matters

CBC News was among the outlets to that initially pub‐ lished the Mother's Day photo of Catherine - which had arrived amid rampant speculatio­n about her where‐ abouts and wellbeing. It had been picked up and distrib‐ uted by three of the wire ser‐ vices to which CBC News sub‐ scribes: Reuters, The Associ‐ ated Press and Getty Images.

CBC News later pulled the image, replacing it with one the Prince and Princess of Wales posted on X, and ex‐ plained that the other had been manipulate­d.

"The vast majority of im‐ ages published by CBC News are taken by our own journal‐ ists or provided by news part‐ ners [like The Canadian Press and Reuters] who we trust to apply the same rigorous standard of accuracy," said CBC spokespers­on Chuck Thompson.

"There are occasions when we publish images provided by a third party that is not a trusted news partner, however we always make clear to the audience why the image was used and where it came from," he added.

"That said, we refrain from publishing it if we have any indication that the image is not authentic. The source is always clearly indicated."

It's important for media organizati­ons to be trans‐ parent about how they verify photos, and about the entire reporting process, says Felix Simon, a communicat­ion re‐ searcher at the Oxford In‐ ternet Institute at the Univer‐ sity of Oxford. In an age of disinforma­tion and distrust, we need to show how we es‐ tablish what's real, he says.

It's a way of saying: "This is why you can trust us, and this is why you should trust as an institutio­n or as an in‐ stitution in the business of producing trustworth­y factu‐ al informatio­n," he said.

Bosley, with Carleton Uni‐ versity, says the media has always been skeptical of han‐ dout photos, but the demand for informatio­n about no‐ table people is high, putting added pressure on news agencies to provide it.

That said, the media should always question the motivation­s behind any photo coming from an insti‐ tution - any institutio­n, Bosley says.

"Why should we trust any‐ thing?"

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada