TIME edits Occupy Wall Street Support from Person of the Year Cover

Thank you. Sanity prevails.

All movements around the world are Occupy movements, just in different places. People are occupying ground. It's a global movement against Oppressors. In the US it's the 99% being oppressed by the 1%. Similar in other countries except the oppressor may be One person or regime.

think Time 'erased' the '99%' from the image . . .

To change the narrative of the image. And also mislead the people who are reading their articles.

Nice try. But selective editing only has one purpose, and it's not to promote a healthy discussion.

As I've said before, if the intent is to reflect generic protesters then find a picture that works as is!!

Again, if you look at the image, it is no longer a photographic record of an individual protestor but an illustration that represents protesters in general because not all were associated with OWS.

Who knows what was going through the art director's mind? Most likely, they were responding to visual things like symmetry and "where the @!$%# am I going to put my headline with that 99% in the way." The art director may have just been responding to the head on stare of the protestor behind the mask.

Unless you've worked in such a capacity, you can't really second guess the creative decisions that have to be made.

Again, if you look at the image, it is no longer a photographic record of an individual protestor but an illustration that represents protesters in general because not all were associated with OWS.

The point is, Time Magazine has been caught airbrushing images again for the convenience of their narrative.

Who knows what was going through the art director's mind?

Who cares? They don't seem to be able to just show us what's going on without being either too lazy to get the correct picture, or too bought by the system to give us the real story behind the picture. Either way, not a source of news anymore. A source of propaganda and infotainment. Stop trying to polish this turd.

Unless you've worked in such a capacity

Don't give a @!$%# how hard the job is. If they don't like the job of being journalists, stop pretending to be journalists and just be lazy cut-and-pasters.

To change the narrative of the image. And also mislead the people who are reading their articles.

I think a better way to judge of their "narrative" would be to actually read the article and see what their coverage of OWS is like. Because, right now, we are LITERALLY judging a book by its cover.

Because, right now, we are LITERALLY judging a book by its cover.

This isn't a book cover. It is an image purported to be "journalism" but which is actually being retouched to fit a magazine-style narrative. That it was placed on the cover indicates that Time thinks it is the most important part of the narrative.

I'm judging failed journalists by their failure to do their jobs. I'm through giving these folks a pass.

Do you even understand the concept of "illustration." Do you actually think that the Time or Newsweek cover (I forget which) of Gaddafi's head funneling through an hourglass and turning to sand was a journalistic record?

Do you think Mitt Romney was actually leaping through the air with a name badge and standard Mormon issue white shirt and black slacks on the recent Newsweek cover? Was that an accurate journalistic record? Or a photo illustration?

http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20111226,00.html

that's a link to an enlarged version of the image. If you look, many things have been ADDED to the image as well as taken away. It is no longer a photograph. It is an composite of many photos and is now an illustration. Get it?

This discussion is ridiculous. Douglas , you are a patient man.

The person of the year according to Time was not the OWS protesters, but the world protesters. They took a preliminary image and modified it to convey the theme of the accompanying article. Case closed. All this ranting is beyond goofy.

I dislike corporations as much as the next guy, but I can't see any diminishment of OWS here. If anything they were saluting them by using a picture of one of them as the basis for the cover image.

Douglas , you are a patient man.

Not really. But I must cover it better than I had realized.

People say they cannot tell when I'm drunk, either. ;-)

Pamela,

You are kidding right? You didn't see several videos of several different occupiers stating that OWS was a world wide movement? Please!

Aside from some tongue in cheek aphorisms like "clean off," I'm not sure what you meant regarding grammatical errors.

As to public gathering and free speech, I fully support it...except when it breaks the law and violates the rights of other folks. If you come and defecate on my property, you will most likely be pretty roughly handled prior to being turned over to law enforcement.

Please feel free to continue this discussion when you get the facts correct.

Regards,

Mike

Mike you've been dogging this 'point' for a long time now... bring the links and use a source that isn't part of your 'homies' agenda.

mountain,

See second post

http://opinion.inquirer.net/tag/occupy-wall-street-movement

From their own web site:

http://occupywallst.org/

First sentence of the article:

http://occupywallst.org/

That was just five minutes.

I find it ironic that the OWS claimed to be a worldwide movement, yet when their allies in the MSM produce a graphic to show this, the OWS bashes them

It's not a graphic. It's a photograph that has been adulterated for the purposes of blurring the story. If a Teabagger rally had been airbrushed like this to remove the American flags or some other important element of the Teabaggers' um, message (I don't grant that they have one, but that's another discussion) then the entire media-o-sphere would be in an uproar about photo doctoring.

But you neatly sidestep this problem by re-defining a photo as a "graphic."

American news outlets have a long-established tradition of WTF covers on their American editions. It seems like serious news gets deleted out of most of our news paper covers and magazine covers, and we get navel-gazing America-centric crap that clouds the discussion we should be having with the rest of the world. It's no wonder foreigners view America as sharply disconnected from reality. Our media goes out of their way to treat us differently, as if we are children too stupid to understand.

It's not a graphic. It's a photograph that has been adulterated for the purposes of blurring the story.

Dude, it has been "adulterated" for the purpose of placing a headline and making it stand out on a crowded newstand.

But you neatly sidestep this problem by re-defining a photo as a "graphic."

In a design setting, EVERY photo is a graphic. Even more so when it has been recreated by an ILLUSTRATOR!

Soundbites from random individuals do not constitute a political platform for a phenomena of public outrage.

absolutely... positively.

occupy makes room for everyone... when it works and those who make it work remain true. there is no way that 'the protester' any one protester... can take this unless we let that one 'leader' take it.

its why i am a warrior in the movement and not an occupier... we can grow forward now, as we have others ready to accept all voices.. it still hasn't happened but we must have that as a point on the horizon. Time does no one a favor by their action, except themselves.. we haven't gone away, so they've boarded the 'train' for a short 'ride' that gets THEM somewhere.

pffffst.. get corporate anything out of our house.

Great argument if the original photo didn't have infinitely bolder graphic impact and far more curbside eye appeal if the whole text were shifted down to the shoulder area, not to mention the virtually illegible text across the scarf could easily fit as a contrast stripe below it so the list IS readable at a news stand glance!

So now you're an art director? Again, they made graphic and aesthetic decisions. And they are subjective, as is all art and design. But you don't work at Time. So someone else with a different, subjective point of view on what makes a good cover graphic made those decisions.

For the umpteenth time, look closely at the image and you will see that A LOT more has been done to it than the removal of the 99% from the scarf. There is imagery layered onto every part of it, maps of the middle east, etc.

Our media goes out of their way to treat us differently, as if we are children too stupid to understand.

Normally, I find little to agree with regarding media opinion...but in this case and based on several posts in this thread, I will make an exception.

Regards,

Mike

signing off with the hallmark hubris

"Hubris," much like "arrogance," is a liberal code word used to identify their betters as far as intelligence, accomplishments and overall worth to society.

Regards,

Mike

No, I'm saying that someone else made decisions to alter the image aesthetically. I could have been altered a million different ways. They chose the way that worked best for what they were trying to do graphically AND from a marketing standpoint. It doesn't matter WHAT you say if readers ignore your magazine on the stands.

How do you know that? Were you part of the final layout team and privy to the discussions of TIME editorial staff?

No. But I've been in that situation and had to make similar decisions. It is part of my profession.

it squelches the energy with satisfaction and we've won nothing.

we are still dying.. I am still giving my last three dollars to the vet on the corner who wears an oxygen mask to breath as he panhandles for money to eat. Some are even building 'a resume' with this .. it makes me sick.

no one wants to see us. They want to feel good, have a reason to stay involved, be validated.. many middlers are going back to what was thinking this thing will now right itself.

please evolve to a place where you see the pain and fight harder.

and just had to stop and say so huh... much like what time is doing.

Actually, I have a couple of comments farther up the page.

Why are people arguing about something that is so obvious? The "Person Of The Year" is the global protester, not OWS. It would be far too distracting to name a world entity to the honor and then have as the cover someone with a big 99% across their face. This is not a complicated thing to understand- why are some of you having so much trouble?

Sam,

Voted up for conciseness and clarity.

Regards,

Mike

Oh, please, stop with the commie gulag talk.

I have never heard of anyone starting a business & working 20 hours a day with the exhilirating high hopes & ambitions of keeping it a small & struggling business making zero to low profits.

If hard work resulting in no profit is what you & your OWS friends think is business paradise then why don't you combine all your pennies & start some businesses that will never amount to anything yourselves instead of demanding handouts from everyone else?

Back to the topic at hand, picture looks like a terrorist to me which is sort of appropos based on the intimidating & threatening actions of the OWS crowds with their "gimme all your money or we will make your lives a living hell" mindset.

Btw, seems sort of self-destructive & idiotic for a nasty old business corporation like Time to honor as person of the year the very bums who want to bring down corporations like them. Maybe Time is just having a little tongue-in-cheek fun with us & hoping to make a little dare I say it profit for themselves at the same time.