| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Home Front: Politix | ||
| Doctored McCain Photo by left-wing-nut photographer in Atlantic Monthly | ||
| 2008-09-15 | ||
| Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic Monthy "Like others at the Atlantic, I was appalled to read about the actions of Jill Greenberg, the freelance photographer who took the cover portrait that illustrates my article about John McCain. Greenberg doctored photographs of McCain she took during her Atlantic-arranged shoot, which took place last month in Las Vegas. She has posted these doctored photographs on her website, which you can go find yourself, if you must. Suffice it to say that her "art" is juvenile, and on occasion repulsive. This is not the issue, of course; the issue is that she betrayed this magazine, and disgraced her profession. Here is a partial account, from the New York Post, of what she did, and of the Atlantic's reaction to what she did:" What this twit in her own, sophomoric way put another nail in the coffin of the Left wing in this country. Actually I thank her. It's individuals like Greenberg who condescendingly look down their noses at conservatives and yell "rule of law" and "abuse of power" yet hypocritically do the same thing when given the opportunity. Yes, Jill. I thank and applaud your lack of self awareness, your lack of wisdom, and lack of self control.
Yeah. ha, ha, Jill. You are a real professional, aren't you. Jokes on you, Jill. Asking McCain to 'please come over here' for a final shot, Greenberg pretended to be using a standard modeling light. The resulting photos depict McCain as devilish, with bulging brows and washed-out skin. 'He had no idea he was being lit from below," Greenberg said, adding that none of his entourage picked up on the light switch either. 'I guess they're not very sophisticated,' she said. And Jill you have no idea how much damage this will do...just like the other fools such as the twit from Air-America, ad-nauseum. The Atlantic opted not to use the distorted McCain shot on its cover, selecting instead a more straightforward portrait. 'We stand by the picture we are running on our cover," said Atlantic editor James Bennet. 'We feel it's a respectful portrait. We hope we'll be judged by that picture.' But I would hope she would never get another real job in photography again. But Bennet was appalled by Greenberg saying she tried to portray McCain in an unflattering way. Then don't hire her again. 'We feel totally blind-sided,' he said. 'Her behavior is outrageous. Incredibly unprofessional.' Greenberg later decided to use some of the images she was assigned to take to make a political statement.
I hope this gets lots and lots of airplay. "I don't know Greenberg (I count this as a blessing) and I can add nothing to what James Bennet told the Post except to say that Greenberg is quite obviously an indecent person who should not be working in magazine journalism. Every so often, journalists become deranged at the sight of certain candidates, and lose their bearings. Why, this has even happened in the case of John McCain once or twice. What I find truly astonishing is the blithe way in which she has tried to hurt this magazine." Jeff. She does not care. It's all about Bush-hate. It turns otherwise apparently sane people into irrational, self justifying maniacs. Hate does that. | ||
| Posted by:anymouse |
| #5 Can you imagine the uproar if a "right-wing" nut did something analogous to the image of the Divine Mr. O? Look at how much play the New Yorker Obama cartoon cover got - and that was supposed to be a parody of the vicious smears made by conservatives. Is this how people belonging to the party of FDR and Truman now treat war heroes? I'd love to know if Greenberg supports hate speech legislation and, if so, I'd love to hear her explain why her "work" doesn't qualify. I really can't say any more about how her behavior makes me feel without risking a visit to the sink trap. |
| Posted by: ryuge 2008-09-15 15:13 |
| #4 At what point to politicians hire their own photographers and just present the photos. I don't think such a time is very far off after crap like this. It's like Instapundit said recently, bring your own camera to an interview so you can post the raw footage if they play with the editing. The media is not a friend, don't treat them as one. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-09-15 14:05 |
| #3 This photographer will find her options limited to smaller publications because the big magazines don't want to be surprised. Still she'll be the belle of the ball for the little hate-republican rags and celebs so her income will be alright. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-09-15 14:03 |
| #2 But wait, there's more! This stuff is now coming out daily. The MSM will be the big loser in this election, worse than Rathergate because it is being demonstrated how the bias permeates the system, not just a few personalities. Like the Atlantic doesn't know what photog it is hiring. Sure. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-09-15 08:35 |
| #1 The honchos at Atlantic are doing a post-'US' magazine spin to save their hides. Michelle Malkin has them nailed on using this individual. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-09-15 08:17 |