Talk:Fauxtography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Where should this go?
The neologism "fauxtography" refers to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversy, and not to image manipulation in general. Redirecting this to photo manipulation would make as much sense as redirecting Rathergate to forgery rather than Killian documents VoiceOfReason 01:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- I just based this on the sources at the DRV, which seemed to suggest this was a generic term, e.g. [1]. Frankly I don't care either way. Christopher Parham (talk) 03:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Since fauxtography is just another word for photo manipulation, it should point there. Note that the photo manipulation article has a link to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversy, so people can still go there if they are interested in it. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Fautography is not just another word for photo manipulation. It's used exclusively in the blogosphere to refer to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversy. Can you find a reliable source that says otherwise? VoiceOfReason 07:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's used to refer to the "fake photography" (hence fauxtography) within that controversy. And since when was the "blogosphere" a reliable source of information? It's no more reliable than any other source (and perhaps less reliable, given the smaller number of checks and balances on what people write in a blog). Since it only started being used about a month or so ago, it's unlikely to be found in any dictionary or other reliable reference. Blogs are not reliable. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- The blogosphere coined this particular term to refer to this specific scandal. It's a neologism that probably doesn't deserve an article, which is why it got deleted in the first place, but as long as it's going to redirect, it should redirect to the thing it actually refers to. Anybody who comes here looking for information on fauxtography will be looking for information on the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversy. Perhaps the blogosphere chose a confusing name, since "fauxtography" sounds like it could refer to any act of faking photographs, but it doesn't, it refers to one particular set of controversies. Above, I compared redirecting this to photomanipulation to redirecting Rathergate to forgery, but perhaps a better analogy would be redirecting Rathergate to Dan Rather. Neither would make sense. VoiceOfReason 08:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's used to refer to the "fake photography" (hence fauxtography) within that controversy. And since when was the "blogosphere" a reliable source of information? It's no more reliable than any other source (and perhaps less reliable, given the smaller number of checks and balances on what people write in a blog). Since it only started being used about a month or so ago, it's unlikely to be found in any dictionary or other reliable reference. Blogs are not reliable. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- The (recently new) word Fauxtography is being used much more generally than just a reference to the Lebanon-specific photo manipulation. I would vote for a link to general photo manipulation, or a page on Fauxtography itself; but definitley not to merely once instance (Lebanon 2006 photo manipulation) of a much larger class (photo manipulation in general). N2e 21:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Can you cite a reliable source using fauxtography to refer to anything other than the various media controversies surrounding the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict? VoiceOfReason 21:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Okay, glad to help out. Here a just a few of the many available from a Google search.
-
-
-
-
- The Flickr amatueur photography site has an entire section on Fauxtography [2].
-
-
-
-
-
- Here's an example of a fine art photographer who specializes in Fauxtography [3].
-
-
-
-
-
- And here ia a very recent domestic fauxtography incident [4].
-
-
-
-
-
- And here is The Economist weighing in on the subject. [7].
-
-
-
-
-
- And a bit less highbrow, one from The Sun, definitely not about Lebanon [8].
-
-
-
-
-
- Finally, I recall seeing a number of general uses of the term in recent blog articles, that is as an epi-phenomena, rather than as a specific term for the Lebanon 2006 incidents. I don't have time to sort out those blogospheric links right now from the many uses of the term Fauxtography that are also linked to Lebanon.
-
-
-
-
- However, I think the eight links I have provided make the point.
-
-
-
- And other editors can attempt to further parse the blogosphere on this, if you think it necessary. N2e 22:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Your first two links are to a couple of amateurs who (not unsurprisingly) independently invented the same term but did not popularize it. Your third link is to a not very notable blogger whose use of the term postdates its application to the Israel-Lebanon photo scandal. Your fourth link, contrary to your claim, does not attempt to do a "history of fauxtography"; the blogger in question merely used it as a title for an article consisting of a bare link to CNet... which doesn't use the word "fauxtography". Your fifth link is about the 2006 Israel-Lebanon photographs controversies:
-
-
-
- First, the biggest story comes in the form of war time photography from the Middle East. Michelle Malkin alerts us to what she terms as “Fauxtography“, where photojournalists working for various news agencies produced reports riddled with discrepancies (i.e. engineered fakes).
-
-
-
-
- Your sixth link, to the Economist (arguably the only reliable source of the bunch, doesn't even mention the word "fauxtography", so I'm not sure why you even included it. Your seventh link uses it only in the title, and also postdates the term's application to the 2006 controversies. I don't know why you said you provided eight links. VoiceOfReason 22:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
