Reuters Takes Down All Of Disgraced Photographers Pictures

A victory for the blogosphere.

LONDON (Reuters) – Reuters withdrew all 920 photographs by a freelance Lebanese photographer from its database on Monday after an urgent review of his work showed he had altered two images from the conflict between Israel and the armed group Hizbollah.
Global Picture Editor Tom Szlukovenyi called the measure precautionary but said the fact that two of the images by photographer Adnan Hajj had been manipulated undermined trust in his entire body of work.
“There is no graver breach of Reuters standards for our photographers than the deliberate manipulation of an image,” Szlukovenyi said in a statement.
“Reuters has zero tolerance for any doctoring of pictures and constantly reminds its photographers, both staff and freelance, of this strict and unalterable policy.”
The news and information agency announced the decision in an advisory note to its photo service subscribers. The note also said Reuters had tightened editing procedures for photographs from the conflict and apologized for the case.
Removing the images from the Reuters database excludes them from future sale.
Reuters ended its relationship with Hajj on Sunday after it found that a photograph he had taken of the aftermath of an Israeli air strike on suburban Beirut had been manipulated using Photoshop software to show more and darker smoke rising from buildings.

Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs and the gang at the Jawa Report should get most of the praise for this.
If you ask me, this is just the tip of the iceburg when it comes to slanted media coverage of the Israel/Hezbollah conflict. There are still a lot of questions about the coverage surrounding the Israeli attack/building collapse in Qana that are yet to be answered (a situation Adnan Hajj figures prominently in as well).
Update:
Not as good as I thought. All of the photos are still available to the public. Reuters just won’t be selling them to any more media outlets any more.
The veracity of these photos are very much in question, yet man in the public are still viewing them as though they were undoubtedly the result of objective journalism.
That’s not good.