Do you remember those old pictures on the advertising pages of various magazines? Or, perhaps they are still there? Whether for diets, some “Atlas He-Man” powder to build muscles; where the “before” picture is always grainy and indecipherable; whereas the “after” photograph is of a beaming, smiling, clearly and visibly an ecstatic person, satisfied and happy with the product and the end results. A comparison of the two — the person “before” and the individual “after” — is always of dubious quality (at least with respect to the “before”), and triggers the question: Is it the same person? But the question itself is somewhat irrelevant — for, of course, in one sense, it is not the same person; the person “after” is different because that is the whole purpose of the advertisement, to convey to the reader that the person “after” is a different person from the person “before”, and the photographs are meant to show you the difference. So, is it false advertising if the person photographed in the “after” picture is not the identical person as the one shown “before”? In one sense, it obviously is, because the advertisement is trying to persuade you that the product being sold is what caused the change, and surely if you photograph the “before” person as being the same — but now different — as the “after” person, some semblance of subterfuge was engaged in. On the other hand, if the whole purpose of the advertisement is to convince you that both the “before” person and the “after”...
An AI-manipulated video has circulated online with a false claim that it was used in a CNN report on a senior Indian military official dancing with another officer's wife. A search on the US broadc...