Latest news with #editing
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
CBS stalwart reveals 'the truth' about edited Kamala Harris interview that Trump is suing the network over
Veteran CBS correspondent Lesley Stahl has lashed out in 'anger' at her corporate overloads potentially settling Donald Trump 's $20 billion lawsuit, arguing edits of Kamala Harris' 'word salad' were done to save time rather than deceive its audience. Speaking candidly on The New Yorker Radio Hour, Stahl, 83, addressed the controversy over an October 2024 60 Minutes segment featuring Kamala Harris, 60, which Trump alleges was edited to make the then-Vice President appear more coherent and electable. Trump, 78, sued CBS - the parent company of '60 minutes' - just days before the 2024 presidential election for $20 billion. He and his lawyers claim that the show edited an interview with Harris in a way that hurt his 2024 campaign. However, according to Stahl, the editing choices stemmed not from political bias but from routine time constraints. 'There was a very long answer,' Stahl explained. '"60 Minutes" ran one part of the answer in Bill [Whitaker]'s piece, and "Face the Nation" chose another part of the same answer to run on theirs. We are under time constraints, and this was done for time. 'We edit to keep our pieces down to a certain length. And this is what Mr. Trump sued over,' the former Face the Nation anchor continued. Stahl's comments directly dispute Trump's accusation that CBS engaged in deceptive editing to aid Harris's public image during a critical election period. 'What he said was that you made clear what had actually been a word salad,' New Yorker journalist, David Remnick, who conducted Stahl's interview recounted, summarizing Trump's claim. 'In other words, what he was accusing '60 Minutes' of doing was trying to make Kamala Harris look better,' Remnick added. But, the seasoned journalist emphasized that both programs - 60 Minutes and Face the Nation - merely used different portions of the same answer to accommodate their differing formats. 'That what we did. We just ran two different halves of the same answer,' she affirmed. At the heart of the legal dispute is Trump's assertion that CBS's editorial decisions were politically motivated. However, Stahl views the lawsuit as little more than a pressure tactic. 'What is really behind it, in a nutshell, is [an effort] to chill us,' she said. 'There aren't any damages. He accused us of editing Kamala Harris in a way to help her win the election. But he won the election.' Despite the lawsuit's seemingly flimsy legal foundation - Stahl flatly called it 'a frivolous lawsuit' - CBS is reportedly engaged in settlement negotiations. Shari Redstone, chair of Paramount Global and a key decision-maker in the network's corporate hierarchy, is said to be open to compromise, according to the New Yorker. Instead of fighting the lawsuit, Redstone wants to settle to stay on good terms with the President while waiting for FCC approval of a major deal. On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that Paramount offered Trump $15 million to settle, but his team rejected it, demanding at least $25 million and a formal apology. But, Redstone's openness to settling has since raised eyebrows within the newsroom, even as Stahl downplays internal discord. 'They're in negotiations to settle this lawsuit. Shari Redstone seems willing to compromise. I have to think that the newsroom at '60 Minutes' must be in incredible turmoil,' Remnick probed. 'Turmoil is too strong a word,' Stahl replied sternly. 'That suggests we almost couldn't function, but that's not true.' Still, the situation has stirred unease among some staffers, particularly with Bill Owens, the former executive producer of 60 Minutes, who has since left the outlet. Stahl explained that her former 'hero' ditched the outlet after 37 years because 'he was being asked to either not run pieces or to change parts of the stories.' A CBS spokesperson told the New Yorker that no stories have been blocked by Paramount or CBS management. Stahl has since expressed 'anger' at her corporate overlords. 'To have a news organization come under corporate pressure - to have a news organization told by a corporation, "Do this, do that" with your story, "change this, change that," "don't run that piece" - I mean, it steps on the First Amendment, it steps on the freedom of the press. 'It steps on what we stand for. It makes me question whether any corporation should own a news operation. It is very disconcerting. As I said, we have had pressure before, in earlier owners. And yet...' However, the CBS correspondent stood firm in her journalistic duty to the people, telling the New Yorker she hopes her higher-ups 'hold the freedom of the press up as a beacon.' 'I'm just, frankly, and this is being a little Pollyannaish, hoping that [Larry's son] David Ellison and the people he brings in to run his organization hold the freedom of the press up as a beacon, that they understand the importance of allowing us to be independent and do our jobs.' 'That would be the best outcome,' she added.
Entrepreneur
3 days ago
- Business
- Entrepreneur
Your Team Will Love This Easy-to-Use PDF Editor
Disclosure: Our goal is to feature products and services that we think you'll find interesting and useful. If you purchase them, Entrepreneur may get a small share of the revenue from the sale from our commerce partners. PDFs are a business essential — Adobe, the creator of the file format, estimates that more than 2.5 trillion PDFs are created each year. Easily creating, editing, and converting PDF files makes doing business smooth and seamless, but to make it happen, you need the right tool. That's where PDF Expert comes in. This award-winning app unlocks all the PDF functionality you need to keep business going, and right now, you can get a lifetime subscription for $79.97, 42% off the $139.99 regular price. Editing tools that do it all There's a reason PDF Expert was named an Editor's Choice pick from Apple, and why more than 30 million people rely on it worldwide: It packs a comprehensive set of tools into one easy-to-use PDF editor. That includes creating PDFs from JPGs, PNGs, Word files, Excel spreadsheets and even PowerPoints — or taking PDFs and making them into image files, editable documents, and spreadsheets and presentations. But PDF Editor goes way beyond creation. Use the program to highlight and comment on existing PDFs or fill out forms. You can also use it to change text, or add images and links into the file. It also supports managing pages, splitting multi-page files into separate documents, and merging separate PDFs into one. You can even use this program to enhance scanned files, and crop and split pages to suit them to your needs. And maybe most usefully of all, you can use the program to add your signature to critical documents like invoices, contracts, or agreements. The fine print This deal is for new users only, and is only valid for Macs. If that describes you, however, it's a great deal — this subscription is good for use on an unlimited number of personal Mac products. Your team already uses PDFs everyday. This is a golden opportunity to make their jobs easier and their workday more productive, for a price you won't beat. Get a lifetime premium plan subscription to PDF Expert for $79.97 (reg. $139.99). StackSocial prices subject to change.
Gizmodo
28-05-2025
- General
- Gizmodo
Download XnView MP (free) for Windows, macOS and Linux
The act of downloading XnView MP creates a transformation in how users manage their digital picture collections. The experience of sorting numerous files dispersed over multiple device folders demonstrates the rapidity with which things become unorganized. This reliable program acts as your guide to maintain orderly control during software chaos. This program accepts any image format you want to open and gives you full access to rename alongside categorize, edit, and export without needing to move between different applications or cumbersome menu systems. The software succeeds thanks to its sophisticated linking of all its different functions with one another. No complicated process exists for image rotation while applying filters and altering brightness levels. All essential features become accessible in perfectly organized interfaces, which makes the program simple to understand for new users. Users who want to customize their workflow processes can access all parameters from batch processing to metadata control and color profiles, and filter rules. The system becomes a strong candidate due to its quick and agile operation. The program launches quickly and operates through big image compilation, yet never becomes unresponsive despite running on minimal hardware. Most software with these comprehensive features typically demonstrates slower performance, yet this one maintains high speed. The software functions equally well regardless of the number of files and folders that need batch conversion and metadata-based renaming operations. Users will notice how the program gives them freedom to work in their preferred manner. Nothing feels forced. The program provides the option to browse through files if you need to. The program supports tagging and organizing features for users who need this capability. The program enables users to modify their images before saving them, both in digital archives and during uploads. The software operates independently of Lightroom or Photoshop instead of attempting to replace them, because it focuses on neglected functionality. And let's not forget privacy. The software operates silently without sending data to the web, and it does not compel users to synchronize their accounts. XnView MP operates from your local machine and stores your files on it while refusing to promote cloud storage or account sign-ins. Modern software provides very little support for user control in its design, despite how unusual this respect has become.
The Independent
22-05-2025
- Health
- The Independent
How selfie-editing apps are encouraging young women to get cosmetic procedures
Like many of her peers, 21-year-old Abigail takes a lot of selfies, tweaks them with purpose-made apps, and posts them on social media. But, she says, the selfie-editing apps do more than they were designed for: 'You look at that idealised version of yourself and you just want it – you just want it to be real […] the more you do it, the better you get at it and the more subtle your editing is the easier it is to actually see yourself as that version.' Abigail was one of nearly 80 young people my colleagues and I interviewed as part of research into selfie-editing technologies. The findings, recently published in New Media & Society, are cause for alarm. They show selfie-editing technologies have significant impacts for young people's body image and wellbeing. Carefully curating an online image Many young people carefully curate how they appear online. One reason for this is to negotiate the intense pressures of visibility in a digitally-networked world. Selfie-editing technologies enable this careful curation. The most popular selfie-editing apps include Facetune, Faceapp, and Meitu. They offer in-phone editing tools from lighting, colour and photo adjustments to 'touch ups' such as removing blemishes. These apps also offer 'structural' edits. These mimic cosmetic surgery procedures such as rhinoplasty (more commonly known as nose jobs) and facelifts. They also offer filters including an 'ageing' filter, 'gender swap' tool, and 'make up' and hairstyle try-ons. The range of editing options and incredible attention to details and correction of so-called 'flaws' these apps offer encourage the user to forensically analyse their face and body, making a series of micro changes with the tap of a finger. A wide range of editing practices The research team I led included Amy Dobson (Curtin University), Akane Kanai (Monash University), Rosalind Gill (University of London) and Niamh White (Monash University). We wanted to understand how image-altering technologies were experienced by young people, and whether these tools impacted how they viewed themselves. We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 33 young people aged between 18-24. We also ran 13 'selfie-editing' group workshops with 56 young people aged 18–24 who take selfies, and who use editing apps in Melbourne and Newcastle, Australia. Most participants identified as either 'female' or 'cis woman' (56). There were 12 who identified as either 'non-binary', 'genderfluid' or 'questioning', and 11 who identified as 'male' or 'cis man'. They identified as from a range of ethnic, racial and cultural backgrounds. Facetune was the most widely-used facial-editing app. Participants also used Snapseed, Meitu, VSCO, Lightroom and the built-in beauty filters which are now standard in newer Apple or Samsung smartphones. Editing practices varied from those who irregularly made only minor edits such as lighting and cropping, to those who regularly used beauty apps and altered their faces and bodies in forensic detail, mimicking cosmetic surgical interventions. Approximately one third of participants described currently or previously making dramatic or 'structural' edits through changing the dimensions of facial features. These edits included reshaping noses, cheeks, head size, shoulders or waist 'cinching'. Showcasing your 'best self' Young people told us that selfie taking and editing was an important way of showing 'who they are' to the world. As one participant told us, it's a way of saying 'I'm here, I exist'. But they also said the price of being online, and posting photos of themselves, meant they were aware of being seen alongside a set of images showing 'perfect bodies and perfect lives'. Participants told us they assume 'everyone's photos have been edited'. To keep up with this high standard, they needed to also be adept at editing photos to display their 'best self' – aligning with gendered and racialised beauty ideals. Photo-editing apps and filters were seen as a normal and expected way to achieve this. However, using these apps was described as a 'slippery slope', or a 'Pandora's box', where 'once you start editing it's hard to stop'. Young women in particular described feeling that the 'baseline standard to just feel normal' feels higher than ever, and that appearance pressures are intensifying. Many felt image-altering technologies such as beauty filters and editing apps are encouraging them to want to change their appearance 'in real life' through cosmetic non-surgical procedures such as fillers and Botox. As one participant, Amber (19), told us: 'I feel like a lot of plastic surgeries are now one step further than a filter.' Another participant, Freya (20), described a direct link between editing photos and c osmetic enhancement procedures. 'Ever since I started [editing my body in photos], I wanted to change it in real life […] That's why I decided to start getting lip and cheek filler.' Altering the relationship between technology and the human experience These findings suggest image-editing technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI) filters and selfie-editing apps, have significant impacts for young people's body image and wellbeing. The rapid expansion of generative AI in 'beauty cam' technologies in the cosmetic and beauty retail industries makes it imperative to study these impacts, as well as how young people experience these new technologies. These cameras are able to visualise 'before and after' on a user's face with minute forensic detail. These technologies, through their potential to alter relationship between technology and the human experience at the deepest level, may have devastating impacts on key youth mental health concerns such as body image. Julia Coffey is an Associate Professor in Sociology at the University of Newcastle.
Daily Mail
11-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
What really goes on behind the scenes of Married At First Sight: Jacqui Burfoot's father Doog reveals what producers don't want you to know
Jacqui Burfoot was a polarising figure on the twelfth season of Married At First Sight Australia, receiving a 'villain edit' on the screen while simultaneously speaking out against the happenings of the show on social media. From being labelled 'wacky Jacqui' by her fellow contestants to being torn apart for her emotional outbursts regarding her TV husband Ryan Donnelly, the 29-year-old lawyer didn't have an easy ride on the show. And now, her father Doog Burfoot is lifting the lid on what really happens behind the scenes of the Aussie reality show, claiming that what you see on the screen is a heavily edited version of events. Doog, who lives in Queenstown, spoke to New Zealand Herald's Stephanie Holmes in April about the inner workings of the show and the editing that makes the popular series exciting television. The proud dad revealed that the character invented on the screen is a far cry from the real Jacqui. 'She is unrecognisable to us and a product of gross editing that uses "frankeinbiting" - splicing different answers to different questions, showing the bad one percent to create, in Jacqui's case, the "crazy" narrative,' he told the publication. As an example, Doog went on to speak about a comment made by Jacqui in her introductory video, saying that there was 'no one' on her level. The controversial moment, which cast Jacqui in a vain light for the rest of the season, was actually made in a monologue by the TV bride, who was explaining other people's work ethics at one of her former jobs. However, the comment was 'twisted' and taken out of context in order to create a certain persona on-screen that made for compelling TV and a laughable caricature. What's more, the dad further revealed that producers would purposefully wear down the contestants on the show in the hopes that they would create entertaining content, especially if the footage that was being captured on the day was boring. He said producers would make the reality stars hungry, tired and grumpy during filming and then ask questions 'to solicit answers that can then be spliced into other footage', a tactic that was often used in Jacqui's edit according to the dad. Doog went on to say that it had been hard watching the show and witnessing Channel Nine tarnish his little girl's image in order to up ratings. 'I can only surmise that the executive producers don't have children of their own, as no parent could intentionally do what they do to another parent's child,' he said. In the past, Jacqui has openly spoken out against her 'crazy' edit on the show on social media. The Married At First Sight bride unleashed on the show's producers in a bombshell post in February, accusing them of misleading editing and twisting the truth about her portrayal on the hit reality series. In the scathing statement, which she shared alongside a smiling selfie, the alleged former Miss New Zealand claimed her MAFS storyline was heavily fabricated, insisting she signed up for an 'unfiltered, raw marriage experiment' - not a scripted soap opera. 'I agree – my character makes no sense, but that's not my fault – blame the editors!' Jacqui wrote. 'More than happy to spill the tea so you can get to know the real me and my story!' She didn't hold back, hinting that she was fed up with being portrayed in a misleading way. 'You've been fed a highly edited fictional storyline and I feel like you deserve to know the truth,' she continued.
