The image they chose of Morales was also manipulation and yellow journalism

[Bonobo]

They could have used this photo:



or this photo:



or this photo:



or this photo:


And they chose to use this:



Draw your own conclusions. But I know what it is -ugly, tabloid yellow journalism.

[xchrom]

1. du rec.

[think]

2. Nice catch...

[djean111]

3. And don't forget - he wore a flower garland!!!!!!!!!

That was the most stupid weird "smear" - as if other heads of state cannot be googled with "lei", look at images........

[allin99]

117. i liked that picture. Made him look personable and friendly.

[Catherina]

4. Rec'd with thanks n/t

[JaneyVee]

5. Who is "they"?

[SidDithers]

32. Exactly...nt

Sid

[sabrina 1]

48. The right wing rag that chose the photo. I thought you would want to know something

about the source as it is such an important topic for you usually. Surprised you haven't checked it out by now.

[SidDithers]

49. You're much more familiar with right-wing sources than I am, sabrina...

being that you're a regular reader of the Washington Times and Conservative Cave.

Sid

[sabrina 1]

68. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? We democrats here became familiar with right wing

propaganda against Latin American leaders long ago. You are generally opposed you say, to Right Wing sources. So are we all. They love you at the Cave, or did last time I looked which is probably over a year ago now. I don't give clicks to right wing garbage sites unless it is for the purpose of research.

[SidDithers]

69. "over a year ago now"...

Sid

[sabrina 1]

72. Happy to let you know when you are accidentally cheering on right wing sources and save you the

embarrassment of doing so. We don't want any Limbaugh/Faux anti Latin American democracies propaganda to be interpreted as anything but what it is here on DU. I'm sure we are on the same page on this topic.

No need to thank me, it's a public service I'm more than happy to perform.

[Peregrine Took]

108. Well said, Sabrina.

[JDPriestly]

84. The photos are from Der Standard, the Austrian news source.

In the original, credit was, I think, given to the photographer. There was an entire page of great photos. In a couple of them Morales was holding a piece of paper on which could be read in block print the words could be read, Edward Snowden, and Morales was smiling that big, beautiful smile of his.

Yes. A picture can say a thousand words, and so can one's choice of picture.

[rhett o rick]

113. They are those that side with the corp-media, side with Republicans like Clapper, Mueller and Alexan

Alexander, side with those that choose secrecy over transparency. Republicans love the Clapper spy machine. You have strange bed fellows.

[limpyhobbler]

40. I think maybe this

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023171214

[Warren Stupidity]

111. At least one poster here on du, an enthusiastic supporter of authoritarianism.

[cali]

6. k&r and smack in the smug faces of those characters

who posted and jeered at the last pic in your op, making up a pile of dog shit about it.

[dawg]

7. Atlantic is owned by a self described "neocon".

Check their Wikipedia entry if you don't believe me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Atlantic

[Pholus]

27. That was my fun fact for the morning too! :)

[The Link]

8. Its racism. Saw some racist comments about the picture here too.

[cali]

9. will those who posted in *that* thead

show up here, or will they be too cowardly?

[heaven05]

10. too cowardly!

for sure.

[KittyWampus]

65. you mean the post pointing out Morales went all tin-foil about Chavez getting cancer from the CIA?

[Buzz Clik]

11. NO way! I am so ... so ... so outraged!!!!!11

They used a picture of his in a pose he chose to strike! God damn yellow journalists.

[Bonobo]

12. Honest question: Are you really that facile or

are you just pretending?

[Buzz Clik]

41. Well!

I see myself more as ductile.

What are you pretending to be?

[flamingdem]

70. Good comeback

[sabrina 1]

31. You always forget your sarcasm tags! As a result you are creating what has to be a false

impression of where you stand on things. See some of DU's satirists and how they avoid being taken seriously when they don't want to be!

[Buzz Clik]

42. Love your smiley!

[tridim]

13. Call congress right fucking now!!!!!1111

This yella aggression will not stand, man!

[tridim]

17. Honestly I don't even know what this thread is about.

It's just neoDU being very DERPy. Same as every day.

[Bonobo]

19. Actually it is a vivid illustration of "dumbing down". nt

[SidDithers]

34. The perpetually outraged will always find something to rail about...nt

Sid

[treestar]

90. Notice how Evo has taken over for Snowden

His issue came up allegedly due to Snowden, though we don't know that for sure. It could have just been a gas gauge. But notice Eddie is a bit dull now, cooling his heels in that hotel, nothing much to say about him until he thinks of doing something else. So Evo gets it all.

I bet Julian is trying to figure out how to grab the spotlight back again!

[SidDithers]

93. Snowden is Paul Revere...

And now Morales has been compared to Harriet Tubman.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023165190

Sometimes, there's just not enough facepalm in the world for the asshattery that gets posted here.

Sid

[treestar]

110. OMG!

I can see that Paul Revere with thumb drive riding his horse onto Bolivian Presidential Plane!

[Number23]

114. That thread was disgusting. You know your shit is beyond foul and crazy when you only get 5 recs

in GD as crazy as this place is now and has been.

[Mojorabbit]

112. Yes I see how he is now the latest target for character assassination

and all manner of insults. It is sad to see on a Democratic website.

[cali]

18. that's all they have. really.

[tridim]

20. They who?

I don't even know what you're upset about.

[cali]

24. lol. you decided I'm upset based on that comment?

ack. your mind reading skills need serious work. You mistook contempt for being upset.

"They" would be the cadre of folks making comments in the vein of the one that Bonobo responded so cogently to. You are not the only one making silly comments as a response because you don't have anything germane or intelligent to add to the discussion.

I hope that clears things up for you.

[tridim]

47. Oh thanks.

I still don't understand what you're outraged about? The last pic? Looks fine to me.

[cali]

59. I'm not outraged. what I call the "backyard" pov is too pervasive

to be perpetually outraged about it.

I recognize that it was used to bolster a story and to create a narrative- that Morales wasn't really upset about his plane being searched and the events surrounding the plane incident. simple really; you should be able to grasp it.

[Bonhomme Richard]

29. FACEPALM!........................n/t

[LondonReign2]

28. Sadly, that really *is* the best tridim can do

[tridim]

36. Thanks for your input newbie. nt

[LondonReign2]

43. LMAO. Thanks for proving my point

Still waiting for you to answer this:

"Just to make sure I understand your position, 23 hour a day naked solitary confinement for a year is not torture, does that sum up your position correctly? "

[idwiyo]

57. Thanks for proving their point!

[sabrina 1]

38. Oh, don't you worry, this 'yella aggression' WILL stand, as the Wikileaks cables revealed,

not to mention other sources, hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on the Western Media's smearing of Latin American leaders. Thanks for your support of the effort. Murdoch et al don't do this stuff for nothing. Eg, check out the source of this 'yella aggression' and no one should be surprised.

But since the Western Media has so little credibility around the world anymore, those hundreds of millions of our tax dollars are probably wasted, except right here in the isolated from real news, US.

[tridim]

45. I still don't know what this thread is about.

It seems like you're outraged about an image posted by a random person on the internet?

Or are you really upset that the Snowden fantasy narrative is falling apart?

I don't support Murdoch, I'm a Democrat.

[sabrina 1]

66. It seems like you're making stuff up.

What is this about, talking about not knowing what something is about?

It seems like you're outraged about an image posted by a random person on the internet?

You'll know beyond a doubt when I am 'outraged'. Why would I be outraged over something that has been known by Democrats since way back in 2002 when Bush made it clear that the West was not going to accept anything but one of our Dictators as leaders of Latin American countries?? THAT was the time to be outraged. NOW no one believes anything in the Western Right Wing media.

Speaking of outrage, since you brought it up. Any reason for your outrage over people pointing out known facts? Generally DU became known for countering Right Wing Propaganda, which is what THIS thread is about. So why they outrage on your part?

[brett_jv]

97. Not to speak for TriDim, but I think you're maybe missing his point ...

Perhaps just because I'm similarly 'lost', I think maybe I'm getting what he means ... which is that you've provided no story to go with the pictures, no context, you've not explained who 'they' are, and perhaps most importantly ... no LINK for anyone who doesn't know what you're talking about ... to do so.

I, for one, don't even know who the guy is in the picture, I had to read the thread to find out Mr. Morales is a leader of a Latin-American country, right?

And apparently there was some plane incident?

I'm not joking here, I've not checked much news the last few days so ... I believe what TD is trying to convey to you is that your OP really makes no sense to anyone who's not been very closely following ... whatever 'story' this is all about. You may want to edit it to include some context, link(s), etc.

[sabrina 1]

102. I think your comment is meant for the OP. I did not write the OP.

Most Democrats know who Morales is, as Democrats in general have been following the exciting developments in Latin America over the past decade or more. As country after country removed their right wing dictatorships and elected their own leaders, rather than have them installed, after sometimes their elected were assassinated. The Western Global Corps have been finally put in their place and they are not happy about not controlling those resources anymore.

I am sure TD knows who Evo Morales is, I suppose I could be wrong, but that would be very unusual for someone who has been around since Bush's attempted coup in Venezuela.

[brett_jv]

104. My bad ... I was thinking you were OP, sorry :)

I still think the OP should be edited to at least have a link so we see who 'they' are, and maybe a little background on why it's important for those of us who don't follow Latin American stories too closely.

EDIT: now that I read all TD's posts I think his/her point is actually that s/he don't think there's really anything 'wrong' with the picture chosen. On that point I'd kinda disagree, I'd guess there's a chance it was chosen because it makes Morales look like he's not a 'serious' leader, like he's a maybe a bit clownish, at least to the people already inclined to those kinds of thoughts.

[sabrina 1]

109. No problem. I guess we do assume a lot and should consider that not everyone is filled in

on everything. What the OP was referring to was that the photo that was chosen for the article was deliberately chosen to convey a false impression, that Morales was happy about what was going on, iow, he was not upset by the tremendous insult to his country by the diversion of his plane and then the Austrian Minister's confirmation that it had been 'checked'.

Morales is the President of a Sovereign state and as such, enjoys all the diplomatic privileges granted to all democratically elected leaders, including immunity. He was treated like a common thief and he was most definitely not happy about it, as the photo chosen attempts to convey.

To try to make it a bit more clear, the right wing Western Media both here and among our NATO allies, has engaged in this kind of 'journalism' against the democratically elected leaders of Latin America for more than a decade now.

And the Allied Leaders of Latin America have made it clear that they know what is going on.

I hope that helps a little.

[hlthe2b]

14. I agree totally... The Duer in question responded to my comment of an "ugly undertone"

with a denial of "racism", even though that word and that accusation was never made.

Sometimes individuals reveal too much in their denials....

[sibelian]

76. "Sometimes individuals reveal too much in their denials"

D'accord, mon brave...

[idwiyo]

16. Agree. While there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of the pictures, using the last one

was yellow journalism. Just look at the sick comments it inspired even here on DU.

Case closed.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. Who is "they" in this context?

[Bonobo]

22. Well the Atlantic Magazine for one. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. Thanks!

Got the link? I want to see the yellow journalism in action.

[Bonobo]

35. Sure.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/topics/evo-morales/

[alcibiades_mystery]

39. Cool

Thanks!



Sorry I wasn't so familiar with the image and story.

[allinthegame]

50. and then again

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/05/edward-snowden-s-parasites-evo-morales-julian-assange-more.html

[idwiyo]

56. Fuck, I really wish I didn't click on that link.

[Bonhomme Richard]

30. And another facepalm...n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

33. What's that about?

The OP mentioned journalism (of the yellow variety), and the only time I've seen that image was in a DU thread. I was asking where a journalist had used it and I got an answer. Still would love to see a link, though, to like an article or something with that image.

[snappyturtle]

81. See reply #35. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

88. Yes, I thanked the OP for that link...the post you're responding to preceded it

[sabrina 1]

44. The right wing rag in question. Did you know that the US spends millions of our tax dollars

to smear Latin American leaders? We have come to recognize some of the right wing 'reporters' over the years. I doubt it works anywhere but here where the American people are denied access to real news.

Murdoch and the other 'reporters' and right wing rags don't do this stuff for nothing.

[Zorra]

23. Thanks. The Atlantic has now lost all credibility, right down there with Townhall. nt

[Coyotl]

26. I actually like the one they used best. He seems warm and compassionate.

And he has a twinkle in his eyes you don't usually see in heads of state.

[BeyondGeography]

37. It's also the only one where he's looking at the camera

A lot of editors would have went with it, given the choices shown.

[RZM]

46. Yes. 1 and 5 are the best pics in the set

I wouldn't have used 2, 3, or 4.

[SidDithers]

51. 1 might have been a good alternative...

though pictures taken in the middle of hand gestures often look strange.

2 and 3 both have a 3rd person in the photo. I suspect the OP and cohort would have the same complaint if #4 had been used, it's just as unflattering as #5, but in a different way.

Sid

[bunnies]

54. I agree.

I personally dont understand whats wrong with the picture. I like him smiling.

[HappyMe]

61. I don't either.

But I got accused of 'baiting' and something about 'spoon fed' something or other.

The guy is just smiling. Apparently a smiling head of State, is a bad thing.

[bunnies]

75. Its just so weird to me.

I feel like Im missing something. What is supposed to be wrong with the smiling photo? Obviously there are people upset over it. I just dont understand why! Its what the guy looks like smiling ffs. Is this pic bad too?

[HappyMe]

80. I'm right there with you.

I think we probably missed the threads where people got into a huge skirmish about this.

I guess if a head of State guy looks relaxed and happy, it's a bad thing. I don't know. He looks fine in the photo you posted too.

[bunnies]

83. I thought the same thing.

Musta been a fight in another thread. I cant seem to find it though & dont care enough to keep looking. Guess Ill just watch the others fight it out. Whatever it is.

[HappyMe]

85. Yup.

[AtheistCrusader]

89. I'm not entirely on board with the outrage but

This pic looks about 100% better than the one they used. There's nothing wrong with his smile or anything, but the body language in the media pic in question in the op, well.. It telegraphs 'tee hee hee I'm getting away with something', in my impression. It makes him look like a 10 year old that just emptied the cookie jar, successfully blamed it on a sibling, and the parents are now out of the room.

This is a serious issue. I wouldn't expect any media source other than say, Fox to present a mainstream article with a pic of OUR president laughing/smiling during say, a diplomatic row with Iran. Would you?

It just doesn't seem serious/befitting the portrayal of the President of a sovereign nation.


Is it 'yellow journalism'? I don't know. I'd call it 'shitty journalism' maybe.

[bunnies]

91. Thanks for spelling it out.

I wasnt aware that the pic was associated with an article. I thought the "they" in the OP was referring to anther thread on DU. I see how, in that context, a more serious photos would have been more appropriate. So now Im guessing it was a RW article? Seems like typical RW douchebaggery to me.

[AtheistCrusader]

103. It was on the Atlantic Wire. Not sure their affiliation.

I don't know where else the photo was used. CNN seems to be using a more tasteful image, at least in current stories.

I think it would be a fair question to the OP to name the media sources responsible.

[Zorra]

55. Yes, I agree, but we are not the intended target of the propagandist.

[RZM]

52. I think the pic used makes him look warm and friendly

Not really seeing a conspiracy here.

[cali]

53. I want to add to this thread that virtually every story in US media about

the plane incident characterizes leaders of the South American countries supporting Morales as "leftist". Why not just refer to them as the leaders of their respective countries? Does every article about Hollande in U.S media refer to him as "leftist"? Of course not. It's an attempt to slur and demean.

[Coyotl]

60. "Leftist" is the new "liberal"

As if that is a bad thing

[Cleita]

58. Yep, but let's face it, there's very little journalism in the mainstream media that isn't

yellow. Most of it is bright mustard and blatantly so. To be fair though, look at all the ugly pictures we've used of Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann to make fun of them. However, to any thinking person, when they do stuff like this, it only destroys any credibility they might have had to make their point.

[Coyotl]

62. It is a good thing the Internet does not have limited space

because I'm not sure why this thread is even taking up space and time.

[ffr]

63. We get the same stuff here

On TV and in print. It's almost blatant.

[malaise]

64. Excellent post

Rec

[KittyWampus]

71. The OP is so fucked I don't where to begin. What exactly is wrong with the pix used?

What is wrong exactly. No one, no the OP'er or anyone responding positively to the stupidity of the OP says what's wrong with that pix. It's a great p ix of both men. Both smiling.

[tridim]

78. I keep asking and get no answers.

It's some kind of weird neoDU clique thing I guess. Old Elms.

It's creepy as hell.

[KittyWampus]

94. OMFG. I forgot about the … Elms. When DU moved to DU v.3 I left for a long time

completely forgot about that whole situation.

It explains a lot.

[cali]

92. no, kitty, it's not the op that's fucked, kitty.

nothing stupid about the op though it certainly is showing us a lot of stupid responses, kitty.

your lack of knowledge about yellow journalism is showing, kitty.

[KittyWampus]

95. Neither you, the OP or anyone STILL can't explain what's wrong with the pix. And I know what yellow

journalism is. Posting a nice photo of two presidents smiling isn't it.

[Cali_Democrat]

101. Ya, what the hell?

All the DUers outraged at the picture, but not one will say what's wrong with the picture.

[Number23]

115. Well, he'll have to get one of his buds to give you an answer. He got locked out of his own thread

[flamingdem]

73. The one they used is the only one with enough light and a decent portrait

The others are amateurish, the one they used the least so.

I have another angle. It's in the eye of the beholder. If you think indigenous people are somewhat ugly then this close up will bother you and you'll think that it's meant to disturb.

If you think indigenous people are good looking then this is a warm candid portrait.

[brooklynite]

74. OMG! "They" picked a picture of him smiling!

Will this conspiracy never end?

[Zorra]

77. Damage Control Unit 3 to GD Cleanup, do you copy? nt

[arcane1]

79. Am I missing something?

Was there a controversy about the last photo?

[JDPriestly]

82. Should we give credit to Der Standard? Is that where you got the photos?

Changed: Is that where THEY got the photos.

I saw these photos on a page in Der Standard. The photographer should, in my opinion, be credited.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

86. actually, none are "portrait" kind of shot compared to this one

so you are wrong once again.

[treestar]

87. He looks pretty silly in that pic

Are you criticizing someone for picking that one, because they have a duty to make him look good?

Why? Because he's a "head of state?"

I'm sure you would not be so solicitous for President Obama, though that's not a good example as our President has got to be one of the most photogenic people who ever lived. It's hard to find a bad pic among thousands. So let's take Bush. He took a lot of photos that made him look dumb. Did you have a problem with those being used?

[KittyWampus]

96. How does he look silly? My initial response to the pix 2 days ago was "he has a nice face".

[allin99]

118. that's what i feel like when i see him too.

[Cali_Democrat]

98. Bonobo...I know this thread is about the post I made...

So what's wrong with the picture? I'm really failing to see the issue here.

The guy is smiling and he seems genuinely happy to be sitting next to the president of Austria. The thread I made was pointing out the fact tat he does not look like a man who was kidnapped and held hostage like he claimed. I used a picture that made him look happy.

What's the issue with the picture?

This post is utterly baffling to me.

[dbackjon]

99. You are desperate and projecting

He looks fine in ALL of the pictures.

You are so wanting to smear everyone that you are reaching.

Pathetic.

[Puzzledtraveller]

105. ^^what dbackjon said^^

[AtheistCrusader]

106. Who is 'they'

Where did that photo get play? I see it linked from the Atlantic Wire... Who else ran it?

[Peregrine Took]

107. Absolutely! I've read that they deliberately select photo's that visually portray

their target in the worst possible or most foolish light. Often you will see right wingnut sites show photos of HRC with her mouth agape or an upward closeup shot of her face to show the most lines or an unflattering sideways shot.

[allin99]

116. Photo number 4 makes him look like a helpless victim.

photo 1 is too random.

[JI7]

119. the pic of him smiling is the Best Pic for those who support him

it makes him look like a nice guy. it makes anyone who thinks he is bad look silly.

the rest would be viewed as miserable world leader type. like you see of those defeated dicators in the middle east in the past few years.