And the hits keep coming. Look at this new fauxto spotlighted by Charles Johnson yesterday:

The original caption reads:

A Relative carries the body of Rajaa Abu Shaban, into Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Wednesday, Aug. 9, 2006. An Israel air strike against Islamic militants in Gaza City on Wednesday killed three people, including 5-year-old Rajaa Abu Shaban, and wounded two more, Palestinian officials and witnesses said. The Israeli army said its forces attacked a ‘terrorist training camp’ in Gaza, but gave no further details. (AP photo/Adel Hana)

Wanna know what really happened to the child? Read LGF.

***

Just a one-time slip-up, you say? I found more:

The caption under both photos now reads:

CAPTION CORRECTION – CORRECTING REASON OF HOSPITALISATION Aya, an 18-month-old girl displaced from Tyre, cries after a routine operation at a hospital in Beirut July 24, 2006. REUTERS/Yannis Behrakis (LEBANON)

Gee, I wonder what it said before the correction? Take a look at the other hospital photos of Reuters’ Yannis Behrakis taken the same day and it’s not so hard to guess.

The Jerusalem Post follows up on the impact of “Reutersgate” on other media:

Bloggers, or writers on web logs, were the first to reveal that a Reuters photograph depicting plumes of black smoke rising over Beirut was doctored to enhance smoke above the city. The Web site www.LittleGreenFootballs.com is credited with first revealing the scandal, which has been dubbed Reutersgate, but the affair has spread far wider than the Reuters News Agency and into several of the most esteemed media outlets.

More than a dozen accusations of staged or doctored photographs have made their way through various Web sites in the past several weeks. None has been treated by the news outlets as seriously as the original Reuters incident, which saw the photographer Adnin Hajj fired and over 900 of his photos removed from the Reuters wire list. But numerous other outlets – including the BBC, The New York Times and AP – have been forced to recall photos or change captions following inaccuracies pointed out in online forums.

Former Reuters reporter Philip Klein shares his experiences and insights. A snippet:

I was often a lone voice of dissent in the New York newsroom when I tried to point out to my colleagues the blatant bias in our reporting on Israel’s struggle against Palestinian terrorism. My case was bolstered one day when the front page of Reuters’ internal website featured a picture of our editor-in-chief, Geert Linnebank, meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Accompanying the photograph was an item boasting about how glowingly Assad spoke of Reuters, which he viewed as a great source of news on the Middle East. After that, I joked that our brochures should include the tagline, “endorsed by a Syrian dictator.”

I still like the clone-stamp logo.