March
4, 2005: News You Can't Trust
By Ahchie
|
With its latest cover featuring Martha Stewart, Newsweek has proven that it is not a trustworthy source of genuine news. They have placed a “photo illustration” on their cover of a youthful Martha Stewart head on the body of a thin model. The text on the cover reads, “Martha’s Last Laugh” and “After Prison, She’s Thinner, Wealthier & Ready for Prime Time.” The issue coincides with her release from prison and their motivation is immediately called into question.
If she really is thinner and ready to take on the world after her brief prison term, then why not just show a current picture of her? If Newsweek is supposed to be a news magazine, what is the purpose of the deception? If Newsweek is willing to present a fake image of Stewart, what else are they willing to do? What does Newsweek accomplish by having a doctored photo on their cover as opposed to a genuine photograph?
Doctoring
photographs is not new in non-news outlets. For example, the head of Julia
Roberts was placed on the body of a model for the poster of "Pretty Woman."
The difference between the Martha picture and the Roberts picture, however,
is that the Martha picture was used for a news story and the Roberts picture
was used for a movie. While entertainment can be an escape from reality, news
is supposed to show us reality.
If it is going to be done for a news story, it should be done so that it is blatantly obvious and has a clear purpose (see example to the right). In Newsweek’s case, they seem to have no real need for the fake image in addition to being an uninspired, bland, and uninteresting cover. If Newsweek is unable to get a current picture of a famous person (Martha) that reflects the current view presented (that she is thinner, wealthier and ready for prime time now that she is out of prison), then perhaps that view is erroneous.
I question Newsweek's motivation for making Martha appear more attractive than she really is. Would using an actual photo of her be uncivilized? It is doubtful that she made the most of the prison gym to transform her portly preconviction figure, fueled by leg-of-lamb and shrimp bisque, into a curvaceous inmate who enjoyed a diet of potato chip casserole and vending machine offerings. Martha hasn't changed, Newsweek has. Newsweek simply assessed their relationship with Martha Stewart Inc. and calculated that it is in their best interests to give her false praise than to be subject to her legendary wrath by revealing the less than glamorous truth. Martha's prison vacation has allowed her to advance from just intimidating secretaries and brokers, to holding major corporations accountable for her marketability. Martha has added another layer of self promotion, as she, with the help of wide-eyed media, can now portray herself as a casualty of vindictive regulators wanting to make an example of a hardworking, high-profile, businesswoman. While the new and improved Martha will cleverly manipulate every media opportunity over the next few months, it should be noted that while she no longer has the right to vote, she does have the ability to influence. Newsweek implies that they were simply being playful with their cover, it is unlikely that the possibility of using a less than attractive lower body was ever seriously considered. After all, former inmate #3756812-6 would have thought it to be uncivilized.
Newsweek photo fix-er-up
Newsday, Aileen Jacobson, March 3, 2005
Martha Stewart parts gold curtains on the current Newsweek cover, which proclaims her "Thinner, Wealthier & Ready for Prime Time."
Only that isn't Martha. At least, not from the neck down.
Newsweek used a trim model for the domestic diva's body, and her actual head for what is revealed to be, at the bottom of the magazine's contents page, a "photo illustration."
"The intent of the photo illustration was to convey Martha's status on the eve of her release," from prison said Newsweek spokesman Ken Weine yesterday, adding that such composites are commonly used in magazines and newspapers. "It was not the intent of the photo to at all mislead readers that this was literally a photo of Martha Stewart taken this very week. We regret if readers were left with such an impression."
But many were, said Bob Steele, senior ethics faculty at the Poynter Institute, a journalism school in St. Petersburg, Fla. "You can't, by looking at the photo or by reading the words 'photo illustration,' necessarily know that this is a photo that has been significantly altered ... If they felt it was OK, they should have said, 'We put Martha Stewart's head on top of a model's body, and here's why we did it.'"
Even then, said Steele, he still thinks it wrong for journalists to "alter reality."
Weine said Newsweek has used the illustrator, Michael Elins, several times before, and that the words "head shot by Marc Bryan-Brown" add a "very clearly labeled" tip-off that the body isn't Stewart's.
