This is what I saw on CNN.com’s homepage this morning:
First, take a close look at the picture of the guy on a cell phone. It looks a little out of place right? Does that look like a citizen complaining about potholes? Looks more like a cell-phone ad to me. The tiny label in the top right says “Jupiter Images”. It’s a stock photo, on CNN? Somehow this just smacks me as plain wrong. When faceless corporate websites use stock images, they come across as inauthentic and soulless. When a top news channel uses them they come across the same way, and it looks amateurish. How is CNN different from a blog now?
Ok, so it was a slow news day, no big deal right? What really shocked me is when I took a closer look at the picture on the left: It looks like a really serious story about important geo-political issues. A protester throwing rocks at police. Iconic. But look at the upper right of that picture, and it says “Getty Images”. It’s a stock photo as well! Now, that throws the whole validity of the story into question. Did people actually clash with police? Is that picture even from Iran? Did protests actually happen? (Well, I’m sure they did, but showing a fake picture doesn’t inspire confidence).
This is a sad trend. I get it that news organizations need to find ways to save money, but I think they are getting close to the line. The foundation of good journalism is trust, and fake pictures erode that trust. They are better off not showing pictures at all.