In the articles assigned as well as in class discussion we have talked about the credibility of technological interference. In particular let’s focus on photography and photoshop. The article gives several examples of how the way we look at a photograph, the arrangement and the editing affects the message that it sends. It is interesting to look at the human reaction to what we see because it is so instinctual. We see a photograph and if it looks realistic enough upon first sight we take it at face value. This article calls into question these sorts of reactions. It begins with an example of looking at a photograph that depicts warfare with cannon balls in the middle of the road and results in an argument of wether or not it was an artistic rearrangement or not. Was the photograph now a fake due to the false interpretations from the viewer. Does that become the responsibility of the photographer or editor of the photograph the way in which it is interpreted? Or let’s look at this discussion in terms of the reliability behind the research we do with the aid of the internet. The internet opens us up to not only text to decipher but visual representations as well. The leaking of photographs that have been tampered with comes into play. In my opinion visual information is more dangerous, let’s say, since I feel it is in many people’s natures to have the “I saw it with my own eyes mentality.” There is an urge for concrete information we can see with our own eyes. Textual ideas and information leave room for discussion and although they say “a picture is worth a thousand words” what those words are can be different for everyone.