16 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 30.1 ms ] thread
Having the government manipulate mass-media material is frankly insane.

Everyone involved in something like this should be sacked immediately, but I have very little hope that voters are going to punish egregious misbehavior like this as long as it's "their" side doing it.

If you had told republican voters in 2016 that within the decade, there were going to be widespread searches/arrests by federal agents without warrant or trial, unapologetic image falsification by the White House and even killings of unarmed civilian protesters: They would have gone absolutely ballistic- rightfully so.

Honestly, this should give hope for people worried about it. Not the fact that it was done, but the fact that the New York Times immediately posts about it. That's about the best you can ask for now that this tech is ubiquitous and not going back in the can.
During France’s Reign of Terror, executions by guillotine were public. It was considered distinguished for victims to go stoically, and many did, which left the crowds to have their fun.

I recall, however, and this may be apocryphal, that one woman went to the stand screaming and crying and begging for mercy. This humanized her. The crowds, soured to their revelry, went home.

I am curious if her pleas were heard because those people were better than we are today, or because social media amplifies our cruelty beyond even that of our darkest modern histories.

> “Enforcement of the law will continue. The memes will continue.”

The Whitehouse thinks digitally altering photos of people it arrests is a "meme"?

That's just as perverted an understanding of a "meme" as their understanding of "law". Namely: the law protects but does but bind the in-group, and binds but does not protect those in the out-group. Thus the January 6 insurrectionists get pardons, and the killer of Renee Good has the automatic internal investigation cancelled.

"Meme" my ass.

I just thought of a crazy analogy. I was on the internet in the mid 90's, using gopher and usenet, etc. It was great then because only the smart people knew how to get on. Then in the mid 00's it all went to sht.

Now we come to graphic design. It used to be only smart people knew how to use photoshop to manipulate images, but now we have given any idiot the power to manipulate images with AI and this is where we are.

It’s the likely intent here that is most alarming.

Don’t think anyone would care if they photoshopped something ugly or inconvenient out of a picture.

This is signally more “look we’re traumatising people” which means they think there is an audience that wants to see that. Dark AF

(very) Important to note this doesn't appear to be an attempt at passing off a digitally altered (/AI generated) image as real, but rather the creation of a digitally altered image with the intent of mocking the individual. When I stumbled across the altered photo I immediately knew it was a joke (i.e. had been created using AI), although I didn't notice it was created by the White House (although that wouldn't have made a difference).
The cruelty is and has always been the point.
Not really surprising. Boomers are finally going away. New order brings new way of doing things. 4chan tactics have gone mainstream.
Isn't this the admin that fought for the TAKE IT DOWN act?
Would this count as libel? It’s a publication of a false, damaging statement in a fixed form (writing, print, picture, broadcast) that harms a person's reputation, exposing them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule.