+34
Trustworthy news organizations put a great deal of time and painstaking effort to verify photos, but the images and videos on social media do not come with such assurances
If it seems as though fewer AI-generated photos and videos are being posted online – look again. Images with six-fingered celebrities and videos with obviously artificial movements have simply been replaced by more convincing fare.
In July, for example, a photo that appeared to show United States senator Mitch McConnell on life support fooled a number of people, until it was debunked by the digital fact-checker Lead Stories.
“It’s so good and so prevalent… it’s invisible to you now. It’s just part of what you’re constantly consuming,” said Patrick Dell, The Globe and Mail’s deputy head of photo and video, who specializes in visual verification. And the output just keeps getting better. Yes, I’m writing about artificial intelligence once again , but this time with a focus on The Globe and Mail’s policy for photos and video.
The rules governing photojournalism have always been strict, with The Globe’s Editorial Code of Conduct stating that, “News images are documentary images. They should not be manipulated, combined or distorted either in a camera or on a computer. ” Further, the Code specifies that, “All images that appear in the newspaper or on the web go through three distinct processes: photography, editing and editorial oversight.
” In response to the rise of AI-generated content, authenticity checks at The Globe have expanded. Verification of a photo or video is a multi-step process that can include looking at other images taken in the same place on the same date; checking the verified whereabouts of subjects in the photo to see if that’s consistent of what’s shown in the photo; and the use of tools such as Hive AI Detector .
“We rely heavily on satellite images to verify and to locate other coverage, to confirm what’s happened and where it’s happened,” Patrick added. While deepfakes are probably the most widely discussed examples of AI misuse, the team has identified other cases as well. Salmaan Farooqui, one of The Globe’s personal finance journalists, reported in February on the use of AI to make rental properties appear more appealing .
Around the same time, Patrick e-mailed me to say that the visuals team noticed that an editing tool had been used to “clone” a flower bed into a real estate photo that had been provided by a real estate agent.
“There’s distinctive shape to some of the blooms that are repeated in each plant,” Patrick noted at the time. That type of editing, used to quickly brighten up a marketing photo, isn’t uncommon in real estate listings; however, it does not meet editorial standard. In this case, the transgression was, unfortunately, not discovered until after publication.
The article was updated to include only interior photos, and the correction documented with an editor’s note that read: “The photo accompanying this article has been updated. The previous image did not meet The Globe and Mail’s standards due to the application of editing tools. ” Since then, The Globe has created guidelines for editorial contacts who may supply photos, and communicating them has been a continuing – but not unwelcome – process.
Recently, a real estate photo was flagged prior to publication because the sharpness of the view through a room window drew the attention of The Globe’s visuals staff.
“It looks like your eye has adapted perfectly to indoor and outdoor light at the same time. And that’s really not possible. Our eyes don’t work like that,” said Patrick. In a similar case, a photographer had edited an image without knowing that it might be part of an editorial story, Sydnia Yu, one of The Globe’s real estate reporters, told me in an e-mail.
“For marketing purposes, it helps to sell the home with picturesque views. ” “Unfortunately they didn’t have the original photos any longer to comply with our photo policy,” she continued.
“As a result, the agent took new photos for us. ” She added that, “I’ve been sending our AI photo policy to every agent I’ve been working with, so they’re not surprised when I’ve had to ask them to double check if specific photos were altered. Everyone’s been really co-operative. ” The policy states, in part: “The Globe does not allow the use of generative AI for creating, editing or enhancing visual material.
Please disclose if AI was used in any stage of processing the images you submit to us. All submissions must comply with our AI policy and Editorial Code of Conduct …. Larger-scale adjustments, including with AI tools, is not permitted. This includes: Adding or removing elements from the frame, compositing multiple images, upscaling, generative fill or extending the background, and exposure, colour and noise adjustments to the extent they alter the meaning of the image.
” Other editorial departments that may consider photos supplied by the subjects they are covering have been sharing the policy with their contacts as well. For photographers and videographers who work for a range of media, non-news assignments, such as portraits taken to accompany a magazine profile, may have looser guidelines.
The freelancer policy that I discussed in last month’s column also includes a section on photos and video that includes very specific information about what types of editing are allowed and not allowed, minimizing any chance of misunderstanding when freelancers are assigned and when they file. Generative AI and AI tools are strictly prohibited. Trustworthy news organizations, including wire services, put a great deal of time and painstaking effort to verify photos.
They have corrections policies that require them to communicate when they’ve made an error, and to fix that error as quickly as possible. But readers should keep in mind that the vast seas of imagery and video on social media do not come with such assurances. So, before you share anything you found online, take the time to confirm that it’s real.
“Unless it’s a website that I know,” said Patrick, “I don’t take anything at face value. ”
Canada Latest News, Canada Headlines
Similar News: You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Letters to the editor: ‘Let’s hope the Carney government hasn’t moved so far to the right that it can no longer hear the less fortunate.’ Letters to the editor for Oct. 2In today’s letters to the editor: Air India Flight 182; the notwithstanding clause; housing and taxes; AI
Read more »
Environmental Groups Sue Trump Administration Over Vehicle Fuel Economy RollbackFive environmental organizations filed a legal challenge in the U.S. Court of Appeals against the Trump administration's reduction of vehicle fuel economy standards. The revised rules require an average of 34.9 miles per gallon for 2031 model-year passenger cars and light trucks, compared with a projected 50.4 miles per gallon under the previous standards. The groups argue that the rollback will increase pollution, gasoline consumption and costs for consumers, while the administration says it will provide more vehicle choices and encourage purchases of newer, safer vehicles.
Read more »
Environmental groups sue Trump administration over rollback of vehicle fuel economy standardsA coalition of environmental organizations filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration after it lowered federal fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks. The groups argue the rollback will increase pollution and gas consumption.
Read more »
Letters to the editor: ‘How lucky are we to have a Prime Minister who … is unafraid to say what he means and mean exactly what he says.’ Letters to the editor for Oct. 3In today’s letters to the editor: Mark Carney; tax incentives; parole hearings; AI; Alexander Ovechkin
Read more »