Laura Novak interviews Professor Scharlott about photoshopping and those famous Sarah Palin pictures.

March 14, 2008 photo with "Correct Camera Distortion" applied.

From Laura Novak's blog:

Professor Scharlot: Palin supporters generally try to ignore or belittle photographic evidence. Julia O’Malley, on April 14, in an Anchorage Daily News article with the headline “Make. It. Stop.” wrote this about my research paper titled “Palin, the Press, and the Fake Pregnancy Rumor”: “I read Scharlott's piece. It contains lots of innuendo and some widely-circulated Photoshopped pictures. What is missing from his investigation: facts.”

Notice her use of “Photoshopped” – the implication is the photos are deceptive. But in the case of the above photo, what deception can she possibly be referring to? The picture comes from her own newspaper! If she wants, she can probably go straight to the photographer who took the picture and get a copy from his or her hard drive, just as it was downloaded from the photographer’s camera.

She wrote that my investigation lacks “facts.” (The paper has over 40 footnotes, so it’s brimming with verified, factual information.) But a photograph is also a “fact.” Can she look at the above picture and honestly say she thinks Palin might be seven months pregnant in it? In her article she wrote that Palin’s baby bump was obvious. What baby bump?

Novak: Allow me to interrupt here and say that “obvious” is the last word I would use about this photo. I don’t know what the truth is, but there is no “obvious” pregnancy here.

Professor Scharlott: Exactly! In that same vein, I would like to invite Justin Elliot of Salon, who on April 22 wrote an article with the presumptuous headline “Trig Trutherism: The Definitive Debunker,” to exam the photographic evidence presented here. And after he examines it, I’d like to know if he still feels 100 percent sure Sarah Palin was in fact pregnant with Trig. If his answer is yes, then I’d like him to explain what he makes of this photograph?

I have a doctorate in mass communications from a top school in that field, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, which means I’m a trained researcher. My research has been published in numerous peer-reviewed academic journals. I teach a senior-level college class on research methods. I’m an empiricist. I believe truth can be discovered and verified. And this picture that we have just examined objectively exists, and its truth value can be assessed. Here’s my bottom line from my examination of the photo: I am at least 95 percent confident that Sarah Palin is not seven months pregnant in that photo.

I was also struck by the dismissive nature of Julia O'Malley's use of the term "photoshopped." I remembered thinking "which pictures is she referring to?"  Because none of the really important photographs which demonstrated that Sister Sarah could NOT have been pregnant, were altered in any significant way, EXCEPT that they were occasionally lightened to bring out more detail.

Then it kind of dawned on me that THIS was how people who accepted Palin's version of events were able to completely dismissive the evidence that all of US found so compelling and impossible to ignore.

As a matter of fact the photoshopping accusation was also levied against my post entitled "A Tale of Two Babies by Sarah Palin."

There were some who simply could not comprehend after looking at this picture...

..why the ear deformation is no longer evident  in this picture.

So they automatically assumed that it MUST be the result of some kind of photo manipulation.

However as I carefully illustrated in my post, the picture was taken directly off of (Palin best friend) Kristan Cole's website. The ONLY thing altered was to block out the young lady's face who was holding the child. (And NO that was not one of the Palin kids.)

So personally I am quite interested in learning what Professor Scharlott's expert opinion is on a variety of the iconic photographs which prove, at least to those of use living in the reality based world, that Sarah Palin was NOT pregnant in 2008. And did NOT give birth to a child in April of that year.

And then I would absolutely love to hear a response from Justin Elliot of Salon.com, as well as Julia O'Malley.