« Kerry's One Position on Iraq | Main | First Debate Round-Up Favors Kerry »

Interesting Forged Forgery

Looks like another forger has been exposed. This one, however, was attempting to show the forged CBS documents are authentic (a very difficult task). To do so the "expert" had to resort to using photoshop . . . "Here is a hint for the good Professor-- If you are going to forge documents DON'T LEAVE THE EVIDENCE on your webserver."

Who should be thanking Wizbanblog for this story? The Boston Globe - they almost printed it.

Update:

INDC Comments:

If you read page 8 of the prof's report, Wizbang has misfired.

The Prof isn't claiming that he typed a matching memo, he's claiming (w/r/t that page) that by using photoshop, he can show that his typewriter font is a closer match for the documents than Times Roman.

In other words, he specifically admits to photoshopping in the report

Maybe time to sit back and wait for an answer from the Professor. A few bloggers may end up red faced?

Update from Wizbangblog:

Update 4: The pdf has been modified (as noted in update 4) with additional language explaining the figure. He calls it both figure 4 and figure 5 so there is some confusion there. HE NOW CLAIMS THE BOTTOM LINE WAS NOT TYPED.

At this point it is probably safe to assume his department head called him and he was trying to fix things. I'm in the process of seeing if his explanation is credible. If so, I'll trumpet it. But so far, I'm very, very dubious.

Update 5: He is now doing more editing. Fixing sloppy work or digging in deeper? Jury still out. But keep an eye on the html version. If he makes the case, you'll hear it here first.

From Houblog

I think they jumped to quick. The guy is full of it, he is deceptive, he is misleading, and he is wrong. But I don't think the photoshop was an attempt to fake up a "typed" document using the Typewriter font. I think he's creating a smokescreen for CBS....

Update: Wizbangblog stands by the substance of their story but has issued an apology to the target of their criticism. It appears to me that the intent of the "research" being conducted in this instance was not -at all- forgery and the repitition of this claim was wrong. Although there can be disagreement with the methods used the charge of forgery was and is false.

Posted by tim at September 30, 2004 2:24 PM

Articles Related to Commentary: