A British blog called the EU Referendum is claiming AP (Associated Press) AFP (Agence France-Presse) and Reuters. The blog says the agencies involved in staging, and chicanery in regards to the time stamps on the different photos. The blog links to itself for it’s claims of as if they are proof of a conspiracy by wire company photographers.

You can read details of the accusations and reasoning at EU Referendum blog here.

US Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh backed the blog on his Monday show:

“These photographers are obviously willing to participate in propaganda,” Limbaugh is cited as saying. “They know exactly what’s being done, all these photos, bringing the bodies out of the rubble, posing them for the cameras, it’s all staged. Every bit of it is staged and the still photographers know it.”

Limbaugh blurs the photos on his site, while the wire services didn’t nor did the blog critical of their motives.

Then attempts by the news agencies were mocked at the British blog.

But the responses by AP, Reuters and AFP were mocked even though the explanations are reasonable, logical and explain much how submissions and releases work.

Has a staged photo ever gotten past the editors desk and been released. Yes. And corrections have been posted once the deception has been found out and the photographer is disciplined or fired.

But to use time stamps as mockery and ‘proof’ chicanery was used by three separate well known and respected wire agencies is bizarre. There were TV crews in Quna and independent photographers. I think before attempting to discredit the wire agencies perhaps a look at some of the TV footage or outtakes will help show the press wires haven’t engaged in deception.

Campaigns of disinformation can come from any source – I don’t think this blog is prepared to admit it is wrong and attempting to discredit and promote disinformation.

From AP Statement of Ethics:

And ultimately, it means it is the responsibility of every one of us to ensure that these standards are upheld. Any time a question is raised about any aspect of our work, it should be taken seriously.

AP, Reuters and AFP rebuttal to accusations by EU Referendum – Forbe Magazine
Reuters Editorial policy:

Reuters has strict policies in place to ensure adherence to these principles. We are committed to accurate and balanced reporting. Errors of fact are always promptly corrected and clearly published.

Reuters is the largest international multi-media news agency, reporting extensively from around the world on topics ranging from financial markets to general and political news.

Some Reuters coverage, including pictures and video, is of wars or conflicts during which all sides are actively promoting their positions and arguments.

We are committed to reporting the facts and in all situations avoid the use of emotive terms. The only exception is when we are quoting someone directly or in indirect speech. We aim to report objectively actions, identity and background and pay particular attention to all our coverage in extremely sensitive regions.

We do not take sides and attempt to reflect in our stories, pictures and video the views of all sides. We are not in the business of glorifying one side or another or of disseminating propaganda. Reuters journalists do not offer their own opinions or views.

The world relies on Reuters journalists to provide accurate, clearly sourced accounts of events as they occur, wherever they occur, so that individuals, organisations and governments can make their own decisions based on the facts.

Flikr Photos – Qana
Global Voices Online – Lebanon and Israel blogs