本帖最后由 免禽 于 2009-7-18 13:36 编辑
刚帖出：
《抓到了《纽约时报》又一个以文歪图的证据！（配英文with English )》
http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-182133-1-1.html
---这本来是在#55楼提出的疑问：
http://bbs.m4.cn ... 80615&extra=&page=5
C）+++++++++++++++++++ 又查出一个谎言照片，及其他，请帮核实++++
2）图片4这又是一个谎言照片：
。。。 。。。
配文是：警察用水龙头，警棍打散暴徒，
但我看图片是警察在为恢复交通，而吊走被烧毁的汽车。请ACer帮我核实对还是不对？
---之后在英文信的初稿中，提出这是一个配文歪图。见72#楼
http://bbs.m4.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=180615&extra=&page=5
---之后在AP社的图片中查到，NY Times,是在肆意篡改---deliberate manipulation
准备重写英文信。
161# 免禽
纽约时报对图片配文的篡改非常卑鄙和阴险。原图配文只说明轿车是在“抗议示威中”被毁坏和沾上血污。纽约时报篡改后的配文则说警察使用水龙头和警棍殴打击退示威者。虽然图片是真实的，而配文描述的可能也是事实。但是把不相干的两者放在一起则对读者形成强烈的心理暗示，那就是被毁轿车上的血污是示威者被殴打时留下的。一个简单的移花接木就把中国警察的“残暴”表现得淋漓尽致。类似的手法就是西方媒体最常使用的一种杀人不见血的伎俩。
期待免禽兄以此案例把纽约时报的阴险用意揭露出来以示天下。一方面用事实揭示西方媒体的阴险用意，以助于逐步摧毁西方媒体客观公正的假象，另一方面也让他们今后在使用类似手法抹黑中国之前三思而行－We are watching!
签名支持。要求真实报道。
希望他们外国媒体 落实到实处。
原来媒体也能这样无耻
签名支持
162# silkrain
高兴看到丝语兄。请对英文信砸砖。
++++++也请各位ACer对英文信砸砖。
一个简单的移花接木就把中国警察的“残暴”表现得淋漓尽致。类似的手法就是西方媒体最常使用的一种杀人不见血的伎俩。
没错，西媒的立场和手法，已经成了是暴力的一方。
支持~反对颠倒黑白的报道~
愚民政策，怎么就是改不了。
搞得全世界人民好像很笨是的！
是要抗议，是要改改！
呵呵楼主好多勋章 真垃圾
不好意思，这些天没来，刚看到。同意hong_hai_er在87楼所说，我觉得免禽72楼写的已经可以了，这封信要速度，不能像对Garnaut那封慢慢完善。本来图片直接引用即可，为何要篡改文字说明，这不是误解而是有意为之。NYT的这个错误板上钉钉，无可推脱，造成的影响极其恶劣，所以最后的demand，我们应该不仅要求他们对此作出解释，而且必须在其网站和报纸上道歉，休想悄无声息地修改文字就完结此事。至于55楼和84楼提到的其它更多内容，可以作为另一封破解谎言、说明真相的信稍后发出。
另外，祝愿silkrain的母亲早日康复！
支持!
开个帖征集网友的谴责,http://bbs.m4.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=182522&extra=
免禽把谴责词钉在你的投诉信后面, 作为投诉信的一部分, 名给ID 便可, 不用人人都给电邮地址那么麻烦,谴责的威力在于谴责内容,建议内容包括以下几点: ( 中英文都可以, 他们有中国人记者不会看不懂中文 ) :
(1) 你来自那里?(2)说一说你对这份报纸有多失望! 有多愤怒! (3) 你给这份报纸的忠告是什么? (4) 如果身边有人要买这份报纸的股票或者订阅这份报纸, 你会告诉你身边的人NYT是一份怎样的报纸 ?
本帖最后由 silkrain 于 2009-7-19 10:44 编辑
166# 免禽
免禽兄：今天得些时间，将你的原文，按自己的思路和理解做了些修改，供你参考。采用多少，你就看着办。
We, Anti-CNN.com and its volunteers, are a media-watch group dedicated to documenting the Western media’s bias and distortions. We are writing to question the creadibility of New York Times (NYT) in its handling of the tragic events that occurred recently in Xinjiang, China. Our protest concerns a slide (column?) of pictures published in NYT on July 6, 2009 under the title “Deadly Riots in Urumqi.”
The fifth picture of the slide showed a riot victim lying in a hospital bed, with the caption reading: "Uighurs injured at a hospital in the city during a media tour by the authorities on Monday." However, we recognized from the picture that not only the victim's name as printed on the wall is of Han ethnity but also his face is clearly Han-looking. In response to our questions, Reuters, the source of the NYT picture, asserted that the word "Uighurs" did not appear in their original caption. Reuters' editors further explained that it was beyond their control if NYT, as a Reuters’ client, made changes to the caption.
The fourth picture clearly showed police officers helping tow away damaged, blood-stained, vehicles, where the NYT caption reads: “Police officers used fire hoses and batons to beat back rioters and detained Uighurs who appeared to be leading the protest, witnesses said.”We identified the same picture from AP photo depository (?), where the original capition was "...". Apparently, in amending the caption in the way it did, the NYT left readers a strong suggestion that the blood stains were linked to the "crackdown of protests", alluding to "brutality" on the part of the Chinese police.
We demand to know why NYT altered the captions in such a way to fuel the enmity between the Han and the Uighur ethnicities of China and to stigmatize the Chinese law enforcement. We are highly suspicious that NYT did so to deceive the public in an attempt to inflame ethnic tensions in China and to destabilize the country. In light of the insults your distortions have made to the riot victims, we further request that you publish our letter in your newspaper, apologize to the riot victims and to issue a statement to that effect.
恩，支持。
支持，要把这些别有用心的人揪出来。
本帖最后由 免禽 于 2009-7-20 11:37 编辑
++++++AC 致 New York Times 公开信（可发出稿）++++
请ACer们，先不要跟贴，给我20分-30分，做补充说明。谢谢
Mr. Arthur Sulzberger Jr., Chairman & Publisher
publisher@nytimes.com.
Mr. Scott H. Heekin-Canedy, President, General Manager
president@nytimes.com.
The Editors
executive-editor@nytimes.com
managing-editor@nytimes.com
The New York Times
New York Times Building
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
United States
2009/07/20
Anti-CNN.com c/o Founder Jin Rao
（此处加Jin Rao 或 Anti-cnn email）
Beijing
China
Dear Sir,
We, Anti-CNN.com and its volunteers, are a media-watch group dedicated to documenting the Western media’s bias and distortions. We are writing to question the credibility of New York Times (NYT) in its photojournalism on the tragic events that occurred recently in Xinjiang, China. Our protest concerns a photo slide of 8 pictures published in NYT on July 6, 2009 under the title “Deadly Riots in Urumqi.” http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/07/06/world/20090706-CHINA_index.html
The fifth picture of the slide showed a riot victim lying in a hospital bed, with the caption reading: "Uighurs injured at a hospital in the city during a media tour by the authorities on Monday." However, Anti-CNN.com has recognized from the picture that not only the victim's name as printed on the wall is of Han ethnicity but also his face is clearly Han-looking.In response to our questions, Reuters, the source of the NYT picture, asserted that the word "Uighurs" did not appear in their original caption. Reuters' editors further explained that it was beyond their control if NYT, as a Reuters’ client, made changes to the caption.http://bbs.m4.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=179267&
The fourth picture clearly showed police officers helping tow away damaged, blood-stained vehicles, where the NYT caption reads: “Police officers used fire hoses and batons to beat back rioters and detained Uighurs who appeared to be leading the protest, witnesses said.”Anti-CNN.com has identified the source picture from the AP photo depository, with the original caption as "A blood stained car damaged during protest in Urumqi, western China's ... ...". Apparently, in manipulating the caption, the NYT left readers with a strong suggestion that the blood stains were linked to the "crackdown of protests", alluding to "brutality" on the part of the Chinese police.http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-182133-1-1.html
NYT owes the public an explanation as to why its photo editor altered the captions in such a way to fuel the enmity between the Han and the Uighur ethnicities of China and to stigmatize the Chinese law enforcement. The caption manipulation has led the public to believe that NYT did so to deceive its readers. We therefore request that NYT publish this protest letter and withdraw or correct its captions. In light of the insults to the riot victims by NYT’s caption distortion, it is highly appropriate for NYT to apologize to the riot victims or issue a statement to that effect, in order to regain its credibility with its Chinese readers.
Sincerely
Anti-CNN. com （signed by Founder Jin Rao )
Its volunteers (Sign)
本帖最后由 免禽 于 2009-7-20 12:32 编辑
请ACer们，先不要跟贴，给我20分-30分，做补充说明。谢谢
+++++++++++++说明和建议+++++++
1）用AC及Raojin的名义，在New York 星期一 上午八时前，按信头的四个email发出。这是要抢在《纽约时报》作它的第二次改动前。
2）在New York 星期一 上午八时前，此信在AC首页发表。如首页出不来，请在论坛首页，通栏用中、英标题帖出此信。
以上两点重要，如果《纽约时报》的改动，是在此信发出，发表前，就是《纽约时报》主动改，而不是AC的。
3）如果NYT 问及其他签名，先给它现在这个栏目。同时AC公布一个统一处（如hong—hai—er？），征集ACer签名。
4）请AC把此信散发给，国内有英文版的媒体网站，如环球等，都散发到，国内一个英文媒体都不拉，这个重要，上次练兵就没做，给对方一个能拖就拖，不在其刊物上认真对待的条件。
++++++++++以下是信的说明：++++++
基本上在丝语的修改上，作了以下改动：
第一段：
---加：photojournalism -----就 NYT 的这个 photo slide 论事。
--- a photo slide of 8 pictures （NYT的第8和第9张相同）
---段尾处加上NYT的 photo slide 的link。
第二段：
We 换 Anti-CNN，突出AC
段尾处加上AC的link。
第三段：
---same picture 改为 source
---Anti-CNN.com 换 we，突出AC
---段尾处加上AC的link。
最后一段：
---把 "we demand to know" 换理性些，同时又不失力量的：NYT owes the public an explanation as to why its photo editor 。。。
--- “We are highly suspicious” 改为positive一些：The caption manipulation has led the public to。。。
---加：withdraw or correct its captions，这个有先例。
---保留要求道歉一句，但为AC留余地。改为：itis highly appropriate for NYT to。。。 。。。
如各位还有好的建议，请在发出前提出来。
谢谢，
没说的，没有thin air的牵头，动员，此信出不来；没有每一位签名，留言的ACer，此信出不来。向silkrain，hong-hai-er,致意，谢谢俩人对此信的执著和关心，让我们用行动为7/5的无辜默哀。
---我本应该翻译出此信。实在抽不出时间，请谅解。如果有ACer愿意，多谢。
作为媒体一点良知都没有事实是你想篡改就篡改的掉的吗? 用谎言和虚假来蒙蔽你的读者 我唾弃你
Very good! Just last two miinor points; (1) "eight pictures" may be better than "8 pictures" (when the number is smaller than 10, it may be better to use words) (2) the last phrases "the Chinese readers" may be replaced by "the Chinsese public" or "the public".
Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)Q20)