On Monday I wondered whether USA Today photoshopped a photo of Condoleezza Rice, and I linked to the person who called my attention to it, Bucktowndusty. This morning he sent this link, which was picked up by Michelle Malkin.
The ensuing swarm must have been too much. USA Today has removed the demonic-looking photo of Rice.
(Thanks for linking, Mike)
Update: Editor & Publisher writes about the blog swarm, although they fail to give credit to Bucktowndusty, who brought everyone’s attention to the doctored photo in the first place. Figures. 
Matt Drudge did the same thing (see left column). Lazy.
Check out California Conservative’s third photo.
{ 13 trackbacks }
{ 25 comments }
Between the Gena Davis TV show, and doctoring photos of her (Shrillary, of course) potential rival, the campaign funding laws seem pretty moot, don’t they? All you have to do is to have the MSM & Hollywierd in your back pocket, and who needs campaign money?
THANK YOU LASHAWN!!!!! I wouldn’t have investigated my original email to you about this if you wouldn’t have linked to me, thus inspiring me to investigate further. I appreciate that. Ain’t Blogs grand?!!!!!
Bucktowndusty
That is hilarious….
Caught in the act LOL. I just love their “explanation”.
When will the madness end.
Oh? So which came first, the published photo or the editorial standards?
Good one, Helio.
Helio, USA Today’s editorial standards are clearly a “living document”…
We’ve got the “third photo“…very revealing.
That “third” photo is the real one …Yup
California Conservative,
That “third photo” of yours is amazing! That is sooooo funny. What a great way to parody the media bias of the left. Brilliant!
ps. LaShawn. That’s ok. I don’t want the direct links. I’ll be a poor sap with a downed Internet site with a huge ISP tab to worry about.
That’s funny. (not “ha-ha-funny” but, “stupid-funny”) Friend of mine just walked by my computer, glanced at the photo of Rice and said “that girl looks freaky.” (didn’t recognize her, apparently. ;oD )
I wrote to USATODAY and asked for an explanation. To their credit, they replied. In doing so, they blamed ‘a newly hired’ editor.
Someone’s resume just got a ding, deservedly or otherwise.
My mistake Miss Barber, I said Time magazine, I meant USA Today, sorry for the error.
My husband is a graphic designer–I’ve seen him doctor a lot of photos and artwork. He’s even changed images’ ethnicities. USA Today purposely made Rice look like a Goul’d from Stargate SG-1! If anybody’s seen the show–the glowy eyes of evil, power-hungry aliens posessing a human body. The graphic designer definitely did the same to her–she’s an evil alien–watch out! When those eyes glow, it means trouble for our planet. So obvious, so low, so…media.
Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa‘uld and scroll down to see a picture of the glowy eyes I was talking about. I also spelled “goa’uld” wrong. I remember in one episode where they killed a female goa’uld–her eyes glowed like Rice’s before she died.
MJ…I couldn’t figure out what Condi looked like until you pointed it out. She totally looks like a goa’uld! That is so funny!
La Shawn:
You and Michelle and others need to loosen up on this Rice photo.
After all, it’s Halloween – what’s wrong with being a spook for a day? This would be a great costume for little girls to wear – with eyes popping out.
Editorial standards are really just suggestions.
“Photos published online are routinely cropped for size and adjusted for brightness and sharpness to optimize their appearance. In this case, after sharpening the photo for clarity, the editor brightened a portion of Rice’s face, giving her eyes an unnatural appearance. This resulted in a distortion of the original not in keeping with our editorial standards.” – USAToday
Distortion, huh? OK, an honest mistake.
So I decided to see if I could make the same honest mistake.
Pow! In 5 minutes this ‘old country redneck has nearly exactly matched the efforts of USAToday’s high-priced graphics editors. I even put it up on my blog for everyone else to see.
Those clowns “brightened a portion of Rice’s face” all right – they did it on purpose for the one and only reason of making her look like a hideous demon (or like the average Liberal).
But this was “honest mistake” – sort of like “Kerry honorably served”.
Ok, here’s a great example of Condi and a Goau’ld http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/archives/006203.php
I guess I wasn’t the only one who thought that when I saw her glowing eyes.
I have the scoop on the photosphopping job on my site by a techie who knows his stuff.
It’s worth checking out.
It’s hard not to see a parallel between this and the “Sambo” image (I blush to refer to it) of Maryland Lt. Gov. and democratic governor candidate Michael Steele the uploaded on thenewsblog, a liberal blog. The image is available at thepoliticalteen.net
To his credit, Tim Kaine, the dem candidate, pulled an ad he had running on the blog. To his discredit, he was apparently already associated with that blog.
Blatant, undisguised racism, such as I thought would not be seen again, but because it’s from the left, the media will yawn.
Are you sure they “doctored” the photo?
It reminds me of the “Thriller” video, 1983.
Perfect for Halloween.
–Cobra
The best thing about USA TODAY is how thoroughly absorbent it is at the bottom of a cat box or a bird cage!
I’m a photographer, I use Photoshop all the time, and I can guarantee 100% that there is no “demonic eyes” filter. This was a deliberate manipulation of the eyes only, and purely for effect. It is well known in photography that the eyes are the most important part of a photo, and no matter what else is happening, the eyes are the picture. the MSM are such pathetic, childish idiots.
Condi ‘08!
Comments on this entry are closed.