P + S: Is it Dishonest?

I read the story of the New York Nets game program with interest.  In case you don't follow pro basketball or celebrity travel to Russia, apparently the picture of the team was altered to erase players no longer with the team, and to include new guard Sasha Vujacic--by pasting his head on the body of former Net, Terrence Williams.

What do you think about that? 

It brought to my mind the current commercial where the mom of kids roughhousing during a family photo decides to paste smiling faces on each child before distributing the picture to friends and family.  That fabrication bothers me, even if it is just to advertise the availability of such a photo-fixing capability.  Yet I didn't mind the old commercial that showed how easy it was to transform a girl's head shot into an angel; that was sweet, and most important, not an attempt to deceive.

Of course there's been much written about altered beauty magazine covers; another practice I disdain.  Jamie Lee Curtis is my hero for exposing the reality behind the glamorous photo spreads, in More magazine.

But back to the basketball program.  What do you think about the photo?  Was it dishonest, or just practical, from a p.r. standpoint?  And would you alter family pictures to "perfect" the image of your family?

From my point of view, In the TV commercial about The Cloud, the original family picture has a story to go with it.  The description of sibling inattention, boredom, and rivalry is the more interesting and candid impression to share with others IF it's accompanied by a clever caption that doesn't embarrass.  I feel the same about the basketball program.  The original picture has a history.  The new alteration is just fake, so it's an empty depiction of a team that may as well be lifeless paper dolls.

As you know, I think P + S is best!  ~Donna

 

 P + S is best! ~Donna

 

Comments

[Tracy]

Hi, Donna! Welcome back to blogland--great to see you back here! :o) I enjoyed that story with Jamie Lee Curtis in More magazine (I really like that mag!)--she has a great, fresh approach to aging, etc. I don't go in for touching up too much with photos--especially where people are concerned. If too much is alter, then what is the real story? I believe in keeping it real with photos. Great post! Happy New Year, Donna! Wishing you & yours all the very best of health & happiness, peace & joy in 2011! ((HUGS))

[Donna Raagas]

Thanks, Tracy, for your comment. I agree--if photos aren't an accurate "snapshot in time", then what is? That's why candids are so much fun for me, even though they're not always high-quality. I like celebrating the unpredictability of life, and altered photos usually fit a preconceived image of an ideal. If everybody understands that about magazine covers, Then no harm done--covers are just a marketing tool. But who wants to see predictable photos of people you know? Surprises are much more fun! In the case of the sports program, I can't believe that pro team owners who are willing to pay unearthly salaries to the players wouldn't just order up a new team photo. They must have wanted the background, specifically, St. Basil's cathedral in Russia. The altered New York Nets picture probably cost more to create!