Editing History

 "Facebook reverses move to censor 'napalm girl' photo"

In an article I read on the ABC News website today, it reported that Facebook has finally seen sense, and after community pressure has reinstated the original iconic photo (top) which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1973. Several weeks ago, Facebook deleted the photo because of 'decency rules'. In effect, they were 'editing history' in their attempts to apply their 'standards regarding inappropriate posts'. This is something I used to talk about a lot with my history students- can you trust the source?

The original image had been posted by Norwegian author Tom Egeland, but Facebook quickly took it down. However, community pressure which included the Norwegian Prime Minister and Aftenposten, Norway's biggest daily newspaper, saw the photo reinstated.

Images have been manipulated since the invention of photography, often to portray political leaders in more favourable light. Consider these photos of Benito Mussolini:

It's not quite so heroic with the horse handler in the shot, is it?

How about this one of General Ulysses Grant? It's actually a montage of three different photos. Once again, it's designed to highlight the leadership of the General, posing in front of captured Confederate soldiers. Only problem is, he wasn't actually there.

And for a final, modern example: the magazine cover on the left, below, shows O.J. Simpson's original mugshot. The image has been digitally altered to produce the cover on the right, representing Simpson in a much more sinister light.

Food for thought: have a look at your own photo albums. Do they tell the whole story? Or is one member of the family the photographer all the time? Are they absent from most of the photos? Have you inadvertently edited history?