But where does it become obvious and to whom? It should be labeled.
Articles have been coming out with pictures that are more and more random, but there’s an even more recent trend to label them for what they are. We should all push for that
For example: article talking about F-16s for Ukraine with picture labeled “stock photo of B-2 from 2005”. It was obvious to me that it wasn’t an f-16 (and I wonder why it’s even there when it doesn’t add value), but let’s make it clear to anyone - clear that it’s lazy news, not fake news
But where does it become obvious and to whom? It should be labeled.
Dude… Nobody needs help understanding that a photo of Trump kissing Musk is a metaphor. And that’s the whole point: it’s designed to be obviously a metaphor. If you label it, it becomes fucking stupid. And if you need a label, clearly you need to get out of the rock you’ve been living under.
There’s a line somewhere where it’s obvious vs not obvious, but it’s not up to you or me. Any observer that may see an image should be able to tell. While this one does seem really obvious, clearly labeling it works for all images, obvious or not
It’s not as if there haven’t been more ridiculous and realtrump related photos; I think there are 100% people who will spend time wondering if that photo is real or not, especially after this. If it were at the onion, I’d be in support of not labeling it, at a site that purports to present industry news, I think it should be labeled.
metaphore
Was that supposed to be some kind of metaphor? Only the fact that you did it twice makes me wonder if it was somehow intentional.
But where does it become obvious and to whom? It should be labeled.
Articles have been coming out with pictures that are more and more random, but there’s an even more recent trend to label them for what they are. We should all push for that
For example: article talking about F-16s for Ukraine with picture labeled “stock photo of B-2 from 2005”. It was obvious to me that it wasn’t an f-16 (and I wonder why it’s even there when it doesn’t add value), but let’s make it clear to anyone - clear that it’s lazy news, not fake news
Dude… Nobody needs help understanding that a photo of Trump kissing Musk is a metaphor. And that’s the whole point: it’s designed to be obviously a metaphor. If you label it, it becomes fucking stupid. And if you need a label, clearly you need to get out of the rock you’ve been living under.
There’s a line somewhere where it’s obvious vs not obvious, but it’s not up to you or me. Any observer that may see an image should be able to tell. While this one does seem really obvious, clearly labeling it works for all images, obvious or not
It’s not as if there haven’t been more ridiculous and real trump related photos; I think there are 100% people who will spend time wondering if that photo is real or not, especially after this. If it were at the onion, I’d be in support of not labeling it, at a site that purports to present industry news, I think it should be labeled.
Was that supposed to be some kind of metaphor? Only the fact that you did it twice makes me wonder if it was somehow intentional.