Denver News Crew Accidentally Livens Up Broadcast With An Inappropriate Image 'Borrowed' From The Web

from the of-the-two-titles-presented,-I-know-which-one-I'd-be-more-likely-to-read dept

Tue, Nov 20th 2012 7:22am — Tim Cushing

It's a well known fact that many people mistake Google's image search for a license-free stock photo repository. Of course, many people are unaware (or simply uninterested) in the nuances of copyright law, making liberal borrowing of images the norm, rather than the exception.

On the other hand, members of industries that rely on the protection of copyright laws shouldn't have to be reminded that "running an image search" is not even in the same neighborhood as "properly sourcing a photo." This distinction is even more important if you're in a business that relies on integrity, along with various IP laws. Having a staffer just grab an image from "The Internet" for use during a news broadcast could, at the very least, put you in the situation of having to pay up and apologize publicly for using someone else's photo without permission. At worst, you could find yourself on the receiving end of a lawsuit.

Somewhere in between these two situations lies another scenario: the photo picked hurriedly from the lineup presented by Google Image search is quite possibly THE WORST PHOTO THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CHOSEN. Charles Apple of the American Copy Editors Society has the details on how grabbing a random image resulted in some serious embarrassment for a Denver news team.

The folks at Denver's ABC-affiliated 7News last night ran a story about the David Petraeus sex scandal, his "mistress," Paula Broadwell, and her biography of Patraeus, All In.

Except instead of pulling an actual copy of the book cover, somebody just ran a Google search and pulled in the first thing they found. Which, unfortunately for 7News, was an altered copy of the book cover.

On the left, here, is the actual book cover. On the right is that image 7News pulled, most likely from a Google search.

Now, this sort of thing could have happened to anybody, but it really shouldn't be happening to professionals. But, as Apple points out, this sort of sloppy work is far from rare and he's got a long, long, incredibly long list of links to prove it (scroll towards the bottom of the page). A combination of careless image sourcing and less-than-thorough copy editing resulted in a situation that was likely much, much funnier to everyone not employed in certain positions at KMGH-TV. The news director has since offered an apology for the "regrettable and embarrassing error" and has promised to take steps to make sure this sort of mistake doesn't happen again.

Well, we'll see. Apple's list contains a lot of repeat offenders. In the meantime, KMGH-TV can be happy it accidentally added a bit of levity to its viewers' lives and added to the pantheon of screw-ups forever enshrined on the web.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copying, images, internet

45 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Rekrul, 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:26am

Did the presenters comment on the image, or did it slip by unnoticed until people started pointing it out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:29am

*Snicker*
Oh dear...

"Mommy, what's a snatch?"

I can just hear the children asking that question now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:30am

I like the fake title better.
I would be more inclined to buy the book if it was actually titled All up in my snatch. LOL Too funny.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
arcan, 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:40am

I got a better one, an Australian history exam had a picture of a painting of the russians storming the winter palace during the revolution, except they were being led by a battlemech, a MAD-3R Marauder.

http://io9.com/5960510/thousands-of-australian-students-are-taught-that-robots-led-the- russian-revolution

:D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:47am

lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
You (all writers at Techdirt.com) are either schizo or don't get your message across at all: "It's a well known fact that many people mistake Google's image search for a license-free stock photo repository. Of course, many people are unaware (or simply uninterested) in the nuances of copyright law, making liberal borrowing of images the norm, rather than the exception." -- Now, isn't it Mike's notion that one should be able to grab ANY image (or music, or even entire $100M movie) out there for any desired purpose including "monetizing" it, that he wants to do away entirely with copyright? Why else the constant railing over stupid applications of copyright "law"? How else can Mike wail that Megaupload should be allowed to operate with nearly all obviously infringing content? -- But a single image should be selected with regard to nuances? HMM. You guys got some 'splainin to do, cause I'm getting mixed messages here. -- And short topical pieces like this don't explain or illuminate anything, are only fluff.

Click here for Mike "Streisand Effect" Masnick!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Help make Mike the #1 quipper on the net! -- Click one for The Quipper!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:53am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Oh look, the resident moron has come out to spew his idiocy once again.

If you were able to actually read and understand what Mike has written, you would realize how ignorant you sound.

I'm guessing that if you looked up your family tree, it would only go straight up, no branching at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nastybutler77 (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:54am

Was it really "accidental?" Seems like the work of a disgruntled employee to me. The reason I say that is, just out of curiousity, I tried a Google image search for "All In" in various forms, and the only "All Up In My Snatch" pics that showed up were the screen captures that is shown in this article. Nowhere did they have just the fake cover. All of the searches had the actual cover within the first page or two. Same with Bing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nastybutler77 (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:55am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Reading comprehention fail. Trolling success?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:59am

Re:
Disgruntled or just had a sense of humour.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keii (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 7:59am

Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
You only need to scan his posts for the word "Mike" to know it's immediately irrelevant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:03am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
[Yawn]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
kenichi tanaka, 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:07am

What the fuck? I laughed my fucking ass off over that one. lols

This is the most hilarious news article that Techdirt has ever posted.

"MOMMY? DO I HAVE A SNATCH?"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:09am

Re: Re:
Probably put it in there thinking s/he'd remove it before airing and then got stuck in traffic or summin =P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:21am

Re:
"I tried a Google image search for "All In" in various forms, and the only "All Up In My Snatch" pics that showed up were the screen captures that is shown in this article."

In all fairness, the results of that search will have changed significantly once people started posting the screencap.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:28am

Re:
http://dontbubble.us/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:29am

Re: Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Yep, it barely matters about the blatant lies, distortions and barely competent writing skills. The fact that he obsessively attacks Mike in response to articles he didn't write is enough to know he's not dealing with facts.

Does anyone know what his "signature" is about btw? I've only noticed it recently, and I can't think of any sane or logical reason why he's putting it there. Maybe I missed the article where he managed to translate some of his thought processes into something resembling sanity? I doubt it, but who knows...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:36am

Seems to becoming the norm of pulling graphics off the internet. A few months ago I started noticing my local news playing youtube quality videos instead of the usual stock from the production source. I figured it was either file format or ease to secure lisence, assuming the channel owner has the rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shadow Dragon (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:39am

Pohotoshop anyone
Damn Photoshop is that sophisticated that a local tv station can't tell the difference.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:39am

And I thought it was just some staffer on his last day on the job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:47am

Re: Re: Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Maybe I missed the article where he managed to translate some of his thought processes into something resembling sanity?

I don't think recording industry shills are capable of forming sane thoughts.

If however, you want to deal with lies and biased statements, then you need to look no further.

I wonder if the RIAA/MPAA pay him for each post, or is he on a retainer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yakko Warner (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:52am

Non sequitur, Tim
You lost me when you used "relies on integrity" in an article describing a TV newscast.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nastybutler77 (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:53am

Re: Re:
"In all fairness, the results of that search will have changed significantly once people started posting the screencap."

True, but you'd think that the photoshopped version would now rank higher as well. Not the case.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Atkray (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 8:58am

Re: Re: Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
My hypothesis is that the signature thing is an attempt to generate some evidence to his paymasters that he has tremendous influence here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:05am

I believe this image is from a SNL skit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DanZee (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:06am

Paying Attention
The station could just say that it wanted to see if viewers were paying attention and to look for an inappropriate picture in every newscast. Ratings could skyrocket!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:11am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
And as a professional fluffer, no one knows fluff better than you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:19am

Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Sorry, that was a question. Forgot the question mark. ??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DS, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:20am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
It's weird... although there are more words in the troll posts, there's even less and less thought involved.

I'd swear that TopCoder from TheDailyWTF finally to residence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DS, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:24am

Re: Paying Attention
I smell a CONTEST!!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ruben, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:32am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Give me one good reason that this shouldn't be the case. I mean if it's there for the taking, why can't I do what I please with it?

Oh, you seem to have gone away.

I really wish it was for good.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zos (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:41am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
and like everything else you do, you screwed it up. it's lol wut? or lolwut?

dafuq man. if you want to be all 1337 on teh interwebz, get your shit together.

also why u mad bro?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 9:42am

Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Actually it's just that if there are less words it leaves more to the imagination, and we imagine things far more sanely than they are capable of.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rick Smith (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 10:09am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
OFTB, first thing I suggest you do is to at least direct your rant at the correct person, Tim Cushing has the By line on this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Digitari, 20 Nov 2012 @ 10:31am

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
OOTB is a fucking freetard and ADMITS it

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111208/12500917012/riaa-doesnt-apologize-year-long-blog-cen sorship-just-stands-its-claim-that-site-broke-law.shtml

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joshy, 20 Nov 2012 @ 10:50am

I hate to be a grammar nag but I quickly scanned the article and somehow missed the first time or two that Apple was actually Charles Apple and not Apple computers promoting there image scanning software that does a better job than Googles

Hopefully for such an easily confused name and on a Tech board that discusses Apple so often. He could be referred to Mr Apple and not just Apple.

Again nit picky and won't happen often however the use of just the last name completely threw me off and left me with a different message until I reread/continued to read
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 10:54am

Re: Re: Paying Attention
Does it smell like tuna?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Boes, 20 Nov 2012 @ 10:58am

I am still wondering why a company is permitted to just say sorry for using a picture with out permission and that's ok, but if I myself use a picture with out the rights I am likely to be sued for copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 11:58am

Re: Re: Re:
"True, but you'd think that the photoshopped version would now rank higher as well. Not the case."

Depends on where the picture came from. If it originally came from 4chan (looks like it to me), that original is gone. Possibly gone for days or even weeks, long enough for the viral aspect of the picture to go away.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btr1701 (profile), 20 Nov 2012 @ 12:06pm

Re:
> I hate to be a grammar nag. Hopefully
> for such an easily confused name and
> on a Tech board that discusses Apple
> so often. He could be referred to Mr
> Apple and not just Apple.

That has nothing to do with grammar.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 12:07pm

Re: *Snicker*
It's the thing from Harry Potter!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zem, 20 Nov 2012 @ 12:44pm

WTB More
Gotta love this sort of thing. And we need way more of it. An internet awash with parody is one of the more elegeant ways of counteracting large media interests attempt to control content.

Image if the first few 100 "mickey mouse" images that popped up on a google image search were all parodies of some kind.

It's a nice way of siezing back culture without breaking the law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 1:02pm

Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
No. It never has been, and never will be. Turning infringement to your own purposes is not the same as supporting said infringement. It's just the cheaper, more sensible option. Of course, you don't care, because in your mind if you don't get paid for every little goddamned thing, then it must be illegal and fought tooth and nail, right down to personal bankruptcy.

Idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2012 @ 1:03pm

Re: Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)
Your link. It is broken.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Nov 2012 @ 5:51am

ROTFL xD
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2013 @ 10:05pm

The London Olympics logo mashup is the best.
[ link to this | view in thread ]