Calling the New York Times' Credibility into Question

葱头头

“New York Times’ lying, New York Times’ lying.
Bring it to light, bring it to light.
Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar!
Don’t twist the truth, don’t twist the truth.”
http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-182522-1-1.html

This is a new version of lyrics rendering the traditional children’s song, “London’s Burning.” It was recently posted on Anti-CNN.com (AC), China’s netizen website founded in protest against Western media’s bias concerning the 2008 Lhasa Riot. The buzzing-phrase then was "Don't be so CNN"---------“Don’t be so biased,” which has created a popular movement among tens of millions of young Chinese netizens.
Now, in all likelihood, AC just might catch the world’s attention again by a new catch-line to buzz at New York Times’ caption manipulations of its slide show about the July 5 Urumqi Riot.

Ethnicity Misidentification
On July 6, one day after the violent Urumqi Riot, the photo editor of The New York Times created a slide show of eight photos on its website under the title:
“Deadly Riot in Urumqi.”
On July 8, an ACer, a netizen at the AC, posted an exposé with captured screen shots, titled: "Reuters' Foolhardiness, New York Times’ Ignorance". The netizen was calling attention to a gross discrepancy between the 5th photo and its caption of the slide show. Depicting a riot victim lying on a hospital bed, the 5th photo image, credited to Reuters, was captioned as:
"Uighurs injured at a hospital in the city during a media tour by the authorities on Monday."

However, as the ACer pointed out from the picture, the victim's name label, which was posted on the wall and in large print, clearly indicated to be of Han ethnicity. The netizen further drew attention to the victim’s Han-looking face, which can be unmistakably identified from the slide show.


The reveling instantly drew a flurry of comments from the netizens at Anti-CNN.com. One ACer jeered, “(Their) blind hatred against China’s peace and stability has made their IQ become negative, and their deceiving capacity can only fool those who had been brainwashed.” Another ACer quipped with this remark: “How could I possibly imagine that these newspaper persons are able to keep their jobs until retirement by crossing the journalist ethics line?” Using a pun, a netizen poked fun: “The New York Times has become The Twisting Times------The sound of New in English is close to that of Twist in Chinese.

On July 7, Anti-CNN.com carried and highlighted a reposting, which had casted a critical light on each of the eight editorial captions by The New York Times. http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-180020-1-1.html

“How can you possibly justify a bus-smashing by the Uighur rioters!” the netizen questioned in indignation, referring to a violent rolling-over of a bus by the rioters depicted on the 6th image of the slide show. The New York Times’ editorial altering had removed the caption’s essential elements of what-who-where-when from the Reuters’ original caption, replacing them with its own editorialized why:


“The riot was the largest ethnic clash in China since the Tibetan uprising of March 2008. Like the Tibetan unrest, it highlighted the deep-seated frustrations felt by some ethnic minorities in western China over the policies of the Communist Party”

“(Now) I have finally realized,” the netizen continued, “why Obama had rushed to a decision of withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. It is a grand strategy to demolish China into pieces by redeploying them to join the NATO forces in Afghanistan adjacent to China!” Echoing the repost’s biting tone, a netizen was sarcastic, in English:
“I had reached consensus with most of my colleagues in our division that the only losers who are out of touch with reality will read New York Times or watch CNN.”
“The ultimate goal of the West is,” a netizen joined in the discussion with this observation, “to render China powerless forever, by fragmenting China, after USSR and the Yugoslavia, to as many small pieces as possible.”

Reuters said, I Didn’t Do it
On July 8, a photo editor of Reuters, in answer to Anti-CNN’s inquiry, published a response at Reuters’ Chinese language website.
The response acknowledged that New York Times’ caption “seems not to get its facts right,” and that the victim’s Han-looking face could not be readily mistaken.
The editor, however, stated that the word "Uighurs" was not in the original caption by the Reuters when the photo was submitted to its client, The New York Times. The original caption text was: “People who were injured during riots in Urumqi, rest in a hospital in the city during an official government tour for the media …”http://www.reuters.com/news/pictures/searchpopup?picId=10756727
The Reuters' editor further explained that it was beyond Reuters’ control if The New York Times, as a Reuters’ client, made any change to the caption.

Right after the Reuters’ response, Anti-Cnn.com and Reuter’s website were fired up by netizens’ comments, running in hundreds, expressing protests, indignations and demands for an apology to the riot victim on the photo.
Anti-CNN acted in response to Reuters’ answer by running a lead post:
“Shameless New York Times, Aggrieved Reuters,” with an edge-to-edge banner: “The True Picture is that the New York Times has manipulated the Caption.” http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-180575-1-1.html

The netizens responded, as soon as it was posted, by calling for a follow-up on The New York Times.
“… … We Acers should make it clear to the New York Times, that unless it makes corrections or issues an apology, the Western media’s credibility shall be forever lost with the Chinese people.”
“I support you!” another netizen trailed with an urgent appeal, “the Reuters response has cleared itself of responsibility. It is now The New York Times who owes us an explanation. It must make an apology!” “We were once rather in awe of the West’s ‘democracy, rule of law and human rights,’ ” one netizen reflected critically, “but the Western media and its politicians’ behavior have taught us a good lesson thanks to the Tibetan and Uighur riots. We now see clearly that the so-called ‘democracy, rule of law and human rights,’ are nothing but hogwash!”

Onwards to The New York Times
Hours later, Anti-Cnn.com published a calling post:
“Act up. ACers!
Lodge a Protest against the Unethical Journalism by The New York Times!” http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-180615-1-1.html

The post reads, “… … the manipulation by the New York Times on Reuters’ original caption was committed with unethical intentions. As a leading press worldwide, The New York Times has seriously misled its millions of readers around the globe by its photo slide. We are lodging a protest in the strongest possible terms to demand for a correction and apology from The New York Times.”

On July 18, Anti-Cnn.com published another exposé, “New York Times’ Manipulation was caught Red-handed, Again!”http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-182133-1-1.html . With an English translation, the posting was concerning the 4th image of New York Times’ slide show. The author placed the original caption by the Associated Press, in captured screen shot, side by side against the manipulated one by the New York Times:

The original caption reads,
“A blood stained car damaged during protest in Urumqi, western China's Xinjiang province, Monday, July 6 , 2009. Police sealed off streets in parts of the provincial capital, Urumqi, after discord between ethnic Muslim Uighur people and China's Han majority erupted into violence.”


After manipulation, it reads,
“Police officers used fire hoses and batons to beat back rioters and detained Uighurs who appeared to be leading the protest, witnesses said.”

To an objective eye, the deception is evident in the manipulated caption.

Systematic Bias
Four days later, on July 22, Anti-Cnn.com issued its third exposé on the New York Times’ photo manipulation, in two parts, focusing on the rest of
the photo slide, “Exposing a Gross Violation of Journalism Ethics by the New York Times” http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-183174-1-1.html

By a side-by-side comparison of the original caption against the altered one, the exposé concluded that the New York Times has committed a gross violation of journalism standards by a systematic manipulation on each and every caption, except the last one, of its eight-photo slide. Even on the last one, the exposé’s author pointed out that the source of the last photo is highly questionable.

The exposé further stated that “Anti-cnn.com and its exposés are not questioning the right of a subscriber press agency to editorial caption, but a grave breach of Journalism ethics and standards by The New York Times.”



Will The New York Times Honor its “Policy of Ethics”?
On July 21, in response to The New York Times’ non-action to ACers’ individual complaints, except for a one-word removal of “Uighurs” from its 5th caption, Anti-Cnn.com published its open letter to The New York Times. http://bbs.m4.cn/site/?action-viewnews-itemid-1370

“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.”

Meanwhile, the ACers launched on Anti-cnn.com an “Operation of Netizens Condemning New York Times Cheating.” http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-182522-1-1.html One netizen posted this protest on the campaign site: “I am shocked and angry with how The New York Times sprayed blood to the Chinese police who worked hard to restore public orders,” he continued, “I am expecting a public apology of your distortions. If I don't see any in the near future, I would advise my family to revoke the subscription of your paper and I will advise everybody I know not to invest in your company's stock because you don't deserve any of it!”

By drawing attention to “The New York Times Company Policy on Ethics in Journalism,” the netizen pointed out that The New York Times is breaching its own ethics policy, of which, the item of 17 reads, “As journalists we treat our readers, viewers, listeners and online users as fairly and openly as possible. Whatever the medium, we tell our audiences the complete, unvarnished truth as best we can learn it. We correct our errors explicitly as soon as we become aware of them. We do not wait for someone to request a correction. We publish corrections in a prominent and consistent location or broadcast time slot.” http://www.nytco.com/press/ethics.html#A1
Clearly, the New York Times so far has taken an exception to its own rule in this case.
It is not the first time for The New York Times to get involved in caption manipulation. In the 2006 Lebanon War, a photo slide show on its online edition, credited to its own photographer, was captioned attributing a very clean young man, lying amid dust strewn building rubbles, to “a bombing victim.” When the fraud was exposed, the newspaper responded with a correction. http://acjournal.org/holdings/vol9/summer/articles/fauxtography.html

（注：作者系AC网友免禽）