Dirty Editing Trick Used on Bannon’s ’60 Minutes’ Interview!
Former White House Chief Strategist and current Executive Chairman of Breitbart News, Steve Bannon, absolutely aced a 60 Minutes interview last night. He answered gotcha questions, posed by Charlie Rose with exceptional articulation and candor. There were so many mic drop moments for Bannon that maybe he could even convert old Charlie over to the right side.
If you haven’t watched the interview, you can see it here. Bannon knocks it out of the park on topics like Hillary, the GOP establishment, immigration and his loyalty to Trump. Bannon owned Charlie Rose on every single topic. It was absolutely beautiful.
CBS certainly sought every way possible to make Bannon look like an evil, white supremacist. But because they wouldn’t be able to accomplish that by way of the actual words coming out of Bannon’s mouth, they used some dirty editing to make him actually physically look bad. Bannon appeared to have red circles under his eyes and strangely red lips. The camera was an extreme closeup on Bannon, but a far shot from old Charlie (wouldn’t want to see those wrinkles!).
An excellent explanation and demonstration by photographer Peter Duke is available here. The video is a two and a half minute riveting display of how a little manipulation can change a normal looking person into a hung over, greasy looking bum.
H/T American Thinker
“Did CBS’s 60 Minutes photoshop Steve Bannon into looking like a bleary-eyed drunk in his interview? That’s the verdict of a professional photographer who suspected something off after having seen Bannon in person and knowing the 60 Minutes images last night didn’t resemble what he saw in real life.
The short video Peter Duke made, explaining the photoshopper’s art, is a must see.
Duke noted that color correction and grading can be used to make faces look better but they can also be used to make people look worse. He pulled up some stills from the 60 Minutes interview.
The first thing I noticed is that there were red circles around his eyes and his lips looked cherry red. And I also noticed that the curtains in the background looked really orange. Now I’ve met Steve Bannon, and I know what he looks like – he’s Irish and uh, he does kind of have paper skin. But he doesn’t have pronounced red circles around his eyes, that’s not who he is in real life. So I started comparing the two shots of Steve Bannon and Charlie Rose to see what kind of differences I could find, and it was very interesting.
He began with the color and saturation, noting the differences in the drape colors behind Rose and behind Bannon. The drapes behind Bannon were orange-y. The drapes behind Rose – and these were the same curtains, were more of a golden yellow.
Next, he looked at the blue in Rose’s white shirt, which was 13 points behind neutral into blue territory. He applied the same bluing degrees to Bannon, and “voila” he said, the bleary-eyed red rims around Bannon’s eyes went away.
He applied the same orange effect seen in the Bannon shots to Rose and suddenly, Rose looked like a circus clown with all his television makeup.
So it was pretty obvious some photoshopping was going on.
It’s a shame, because the great thing about the Charlie Rose interview with Bannon was its no-holds-barred honesty. It made for great television – Rose was laying it all on the line and Bannon was volleying back. It made for great television, and viewers could decide for themselves what they wanted to think.
But someone behind the scenes at 60 Minutes wanted to put their thumb on the scale and cater to the low-information voters who weren’t interested in the battle of ideas, just appearances. They made Bannon into a bleary-eyed drunk, reinforcing the prejudices of the left to tilt the scale against Bannon. What a lowdown corrupt act. Any questions as to why the public despises the mainstream media?”
I suppose when you can’t make your points on substance you get desperate. CBS can only edit the actual interview to a certain extent. So they figured why not appeal a little more to the subconscious of the viewer by trying to simply make him look ugly?
There is an actual psychological phenomenon called the “what is beautiful is good” phenomenon. Studies show definitively that people tend to attribute positive social qualities to those they determine are good looking. Good to know CBS is psychologically manipulating us.
Liberals get desperate when they know they are looking like fools and Bannon certainly did accomplish that with his words. They seem to have no problem taking the low road in situations like this.
Please share and spread this evidence of blatant manipulation around by CBS.
People need to see how stupid the liberal media really thinks we are!