The problem is that the stream of images we are seeing are being produced as a result of bias.
The photos may or may not be real because there are actually various degrees of fauxtography and various degrees of staging. A look at this presentation can be informative in that regard.
A photo doesn't have to be photoshopped to be fake. It doesn't even have to be entirely phony if it's manipulated.
Does it matter whether these photos were staged or not?
The larger problem is the sheer scale of media distortion and the unwillingness to question whether a photo is real. There have been plenty of verified 'fake' photos from conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah. And individuals can only speculate at this point whether any individual photo is real or not.
The problem is that the stream of images we are seeing are being produced as a result of bias. Some of the photos are real in that they are unphotoshopped. Some are real in that they even depict actual events. A few may even be real in that they were not staged or manipulated in any way by anyone involved in the process.
But they're all the product of a selective filtering process that chooses which photos are 'marketable' and which aren't. The attacks on David Frum, whom I am not a fan of, are a cynical attempt at denying the bias by finding a mistake or supposed mistake by a critic of that bias.
New York Magazine, which shamelessly ran the phony Katie Zavadski exonerating Hamas of the kidnapping and murder of three teens based on a Tweet from a BuzzFeed contributor (because journalism) ran a smug post titled "We Are All David Frum, False-Rumor-Spreader."
Seriously. The magazine whose idea of journalism is sourcing a few Tweets to falsely claim something untrue about a major world event and that continues to run the same false story, is acting as if it's somehow superior to Frum.
Why? Because David Frum apologized and New York Magazine's Adam Moss and Katie Zavadski will never apologize because the concept of honesty is as alien to them as it is to Hamas.
New York Magazine's smugness is really the immunity from accountability that comes from being on the right side of the left.
Speaking of that, Reason Magazine decided to jump in with its own contribution, "David Frum, Gaza Truther".
At Reason, you can question everything, except the mainstream media when it comes to terrorism. But Reason's "Truther" smugness is a bit strange considering the magazine's issues with Holocaust denial. That material is from the 70s, but some of those responsible have still stuck around.
And here's a eulogy from Reason in 2004.
In trying to judge the motive and conduct of the Allies more objectively than did nationalist propaganda, Martin did slide distressingly into downplaying the crimes of the Axis. In later years his World War II revisionism shifted into Holocaust revisionism, and he joined the editorial board for the Institute for Historical Review. This sort of unsavory association will in the eyes of many discredit all his work, but it ought not.