We have removed links in this thread because some pointed to discourse that we felt was not appropriate. The comments themselves, of course,remain: GBU Editor

After looking at the additional photos above it is clear that the fire did not scorch everything at the scene, and it is entirely plausible that the doll wound up getting sucked there by air pressure during the ceiling collapse, which could have occurred after the fire was extinguished. With 100mph winds in the area during the fires, it is also entirely possible that the doll blew into the ruins of the house from another location, perhaps dropped by a child evacuating a hilltop house the whipped away by a strong gust. I can imagine many scenarios explaining the relatively clean doll lying on the charcoal that do not involve a petty fraud by the photographer.

I suppose the famous photo of Rosa Parks sitting in front of the white guy, who was actually a UPI reporter, Nicholas C. Chriss, must really anger some sticklers for “objective” photojournalism because that photo was staged to look like a candid shot. My perspective is that particular UPI photo is still emotionally true, and a valuable historical document, despite the inclusion of a member of the media in to frame to lend it a more handsome composition. That Rosa Parks photo is much less staged than any of the many photos of George Bush II in a flight-suit during his “Mission Accomplished” photo op. In that case the media took true unmanipulated photos that served to tell a big lie.

More philosophically: Every time a photographer makes an exposure he or she is deciding what parts of the world to leave out and what subject to include. Black and white photos leave out the color we see, so they are never accurate representations of what was perceived at the time with human vision. Even color photos and video do not represent three dimensions and only show a moment of time. While photography appears to be an objective media it can never be entirely truthful.

In summary, I think this controversy is to trivial to continue.

You live in a country where your president lied to the world and invaded a sovereign nation, causing much death and destruction, all with ‘big media’ compliance. Yet, your grand stand for journalistic honesty is a complaint about a door knob having soot or not? May I suggest that your good intentions be employed at fighting real issues of journalistic honesty?

current news is a part of the competative views business.News should be a result of a investigation fair and balanced, why not post opposing articles with disclosures including photograps.

What are you expecting high resolution images to show you? Whether or not the doll was Photoshopped into the scene? Marks on the door knob where the soot was wiped off? What the hell are you expecting to see?!

Once again, you seem to be assuming that the scene was untouched until Mario got there to shoot it. Maybe some soot was wiped off the door knob when a firefighter touched it. Ever think of that?! It seems like a VERY LIKELY occurrence at a fire scene, but you’re still asking for high res photos as if they’re going to help you prove some great wrongdoing.

I’m convinced that you’re simply addicted to your own hot air. If you are so interested in bringing the TRUTH to the People, why don’t you turn your attention to something that REALLY matters, such as the crimes perpetrated against the American people by the current administration, or maybe the truth behind the relationship between pharmaceutical companies and the health care industry.

The work you put into THOSE investigations could actually help some people, and I would fully support your incessant digging in that quest. But in this case, you are wasting your time and mine, every time I read one of your useless whiny posts and I feel like I have to reply to simply help you to MOVE ON, and drop your useless with hunt.

I’m sorry that people are sending e-mails to your personal account. I don’t know why they’re writing your daughter, but I can speculate that they’re writing to you because you are pissing people off and they want to let you know. Take it as a sign that, just because you have your doctorate, and some public recognition to go with it, it doesn’t mean you are incapable of acting like a boob — which you are. I’m sorry, but you are.

Please step outside your thought-box and realize how useless and silly your requests are.

Cheers.

As said before in the other comments, if you don’t have solid proofs and you start to say that the photos “have been tampered” “are fake” “staged” or any other adjective you may use, without any proof you are doing slander, which is prosecuted by the law.

This also leads us to other conclusions too your website listed in your name stiny journalism dot com… wait?? are you trying to get attention to your name and your website with these photos?? doing PR to be known?? slandering so people go to your website???

Hey in this post now they aren’t “your” experts? funny….

Well sorry to see you and your daughter are getting flame mail, but what could you expect if you started such an accusation without valid proofs?? how would you feel if your daughter was the victim of slander???, while some of us are more educated, other will not follow any rule, this is real life welcome to planet earth.

If they give you the photos, they would have to give to ANYONE their photos, they don’t owe you nothing, and until you don’t present a hardcore piece of evidence, reuters owes you anything at all.

Ethics? you are one to talk… you were the one slandering and talk about ethics?? shame on you.

Can you imagine George Will at Newsweek friend’s when he is criticized, openly campaigning with insults and personal attacks against the individuals who criticizes him –while Newsweek stands by and posts their comments?

Does Reuters have a policy regarding this? Is this acceptable behavior for Reuters employee’s “friends”? George Will apparently does not have such friends– or is it that Newsweek would not cotton such nonsense and would investigate to see if their employee is behind the campaign? Perception or real, the appearance of Reuters condoning such attacks upon me and my daughter by friends of a Reuters employee, is there.

I am attacked by Mario’s friends (aka Chris Weeks and his friends) only because I want to have the photographs examined by experts since Reuters has failed to do so themselves. Beyond Reuters saying the photos are fine and the public saying maybe not–opinions can tested by facts and the truth known. Reuters can use fire science experts on their own, of course, but have not.

Why? They say they prefer a “editorial process” to test whether or not –say, a door knob should be sooted covered but is not and was likely wiped off–than using a fire science professor at a leading fire engineering dept.

I dare not (now) name the experts I am consulting here on this blog for fear they too, like my daughter and I, will be personally attacked and flamed by emails and comments by Mario’s friends.

Reuters can obviously contact and work with any fire science experts in the world…yet they offer none to the public to quell the doubts. Again, I ask why?

I first learned about the public’s questions regarding Mario’s photo right here on this blog.

I have never declared it staged. There is not enough information– yet– to know. I am seeking transparency and truthfulness from Reuters. Their ethical duty is to make the photos, and information regarding them, transparent.

Why doesn’t Reuters make the 5 images now at question available right here on this blog at higher rez for all the world to see. If they have nothing to hide, providing larger images than 200×300 that are here now, will allow us, or anyone in the public, to determine their opinion regarding the facts.