BBC is one of those news sources that I trust and use often. And so does the rest of the world (not just in the UK).
However, after footage of a volcano eruption (used for Patagonia TV documentary) went viral, BBC was forced to admit they faked the footage they marketed as real.
How far is to far when trying to show reality?
"Our aim was to represent the stunning visual spectacle of an eruption. We took time-lapse images from the Calbuco volcano filmed in early 2015 and the lightning shots were superimposed onto the erupting cloud.”
But they did not disclose that it wasn’t reality. And they used overlaying eruptions, plus lighting images to create the video. Sounds a bit excessive to me...
In a visual society, can you blame them?
A documentary about volcanoes can probably only be riveting to some. But really how many people are going to watch that?
Add some cool extra visuals and make the volcano look AWESOME, and who knows maybe then you have an audience?
I mean it does look pretty dang cool...
“In order to show viewers the extraordinary spectacle of a dirty thunderstorm with lightning flashes that would be impossible to capture in a single camera, a composite image was put together from footage from two Patagonian volcanoes. However, we recognise that this should have been made clear.”
What do you think? Did BBC really mess up on this one?
I’m leaving this up to my Vingle friends and the news community resonant BBC lover@InPlainSight to figure this one out.