New Book Makes The Case For Why Copyright... >>
<< So Much For Competing In The Market: Grab Bag...
 tdicon 

Too Much Free Time

by Tim Cushing

Tue, Nov 20th 2012 7:22am




Filed Under:
copying, images, internet


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

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.


45 Comments | Leave a Comment

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

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Rekrul, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 7:26am

    Did the presenters comment on the image, or did it slip by unnoticed until people started pointing it out?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    silverscarcat (profile), Nov 20th, 2012 @ 7:29am

    *Snicker*

    Oh dear...

    "Mommy, what's a snatch?"

    I can just hear the children asking that question now.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    weneedhelp (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    arcan, Nov 20th, 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

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Nov 20th, 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!

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Keii (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

         

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          PaulT (profile), Nov 20th, 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...

           

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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.

             

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Atkray (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

             

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Nastybutler77 (profile), Nov 20th, 2012 @ 7:55am

      Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)

      Reading comprehention fail. Trolling success?

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      weneedhelp (profile), Nov 20th, 2012 @ 8:03am

      Re: lol whut? (I've been aching to use that!)

      [Yawn]

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      DS, Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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.

         

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Ruben, Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Zos (profile), Nov 20th, 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?

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Rick Smith (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Digitari, Nov 20th, 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

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Nastybutler77 (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 7:59am

      Re:

      Disgruntled or just had a sense of humour.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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

         

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      PaulT (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Nastybutler77 (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

         

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Chronno S. Trigger (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

           

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 8:28am

      Re:

      http://dontbubble.us/

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    kenichi tanaka, Nov 20th, 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?"

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 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.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Shadow Dragon (profile), Nov 20th, 2012 @ 8:39am

    Pohotoshop anyone

    Damn Photoshop is that sophisticated that a local tv station can't tell the difference.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    jupiterkansas (profile), Nov 20th, 2012 @ 8:39am

    And I thought it was just some staffer on his last day on the job.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Yakko Warner (profile), Nov 20th, 2012 @ 8:52am

    Non sequitur, Tim

    You lost me when you used "relies on integrity" in an article describing a TV newscast.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 9:05am

    I believe this image is from a SNL skit.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    DanZee (profile), Nov 20th, 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!

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Joshy, Nov 20th, 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

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      btr1701 (profile), Nov 20th, 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.

       

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Boes, Nov 20th, 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.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Zem, Nov 20th, 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.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 24th, 2012 @ 5:51am

    ROTFL xD

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 14th, 2013 @ 10:05pm

    The London Olympics logo mashup is the best.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
New Book Makes The Case For Why Copyright... >>
<< So Much For Competing In The Market: Grab Bag...
 tdicon 
Follow Techdirt
Advertisement
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Recent Stories

Friday

11:36 Court Tells AZ Legislator To Fix His Unconstitutional Revenge Porn Bill; He Immediately Makes It Much Worse (1)
10:30 Snowden Docs: New Zealand Spying On Friendly Neighboring Countries For The NSA (5)
09:29 Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Demands $2,100 To Reveal The Emails He's Had With The MPAA (49)
08:11 Albuquerque Police Dept. 'Complies' With Records Request By Releasing Password-Protected Videos... But Not The Password (25)
06:11 Canadian Border Patrol Charge Traveler With 'Obstruction' For Refusing To Give Up His Phone Password (36)
04:06 Wordpress Wins Case Against DMCA Abuser... Who Ignored The Proceedings (12)
01:02 EU's Socialist Politicians Come Out Strongly Against Corporate Sovereignty -- To A Certain Extent... (7)

Thursday

21:03 Why Online Attacks By Nations Are Problematic: Enemies Can Learn From Your Digital Weapons, Then Turn Improved Versions Against You (16)
17:00 DailyDirt: Science With (And Without) Verification (10)
15:53 EFF Grabs Two More Docs From The NSA, Detailing Expanded Post-9/11 Surveillance Powers And Section 702 Justifications (6)
More arrow
Advertisement
Support Techdirt - Get Great Stuff!

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.