ֱ

Photo group says it has ‘suspended attribution’ of historic Vietnam picture because of doubts

Photo group says it has ‘suspended attribution’ of historic Vietnam picture because of doubts
Vietnam War survivor Kim Phuc Phan Thi (L), also known as the "Napalm Girl," poses with photojournalist Nick Ut holding his 1972 Pulitzer Prize and World Press Photo award-winning photograph during the presentation of the Spanish edition of her book at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship in San José on April 12, 2023. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 17 May 2025

Photo group says it has ‘suspended attribution’ of historic Vietnam picture because of doubts

Photo group says it has ‘suspended attribution’ of historic Vietnam picture because of doubts
  • World Press Photo honored AP’s Nick Ut with its ” photo of the year ” in 1973
  • Picture of girl running from a napalm attack became an iconic symbol of the war’s tragedy

An organization that honored The Associated Press’ Nick Ut with its ” photo of the year ” in 1973 for a picture of a girl running from a napalm attack in the Vietnam War says it has “suspended its attribution” to Ut because of doubts over who actually took it.
World Press Photo’s report Friday adds to the muddle over an issue that has split the photographic community since a movie earlier this year, “The Stringer,” questioned Ut’s authorship. The photo of a naked and terrified Kim Phuc became an iconic symbol of the war’s tragedy.
After two investigations, The Associated Press said it found no definitive evidence to warrant stripping Ut’s photo credit. The AP said it was possible Ut took the picture, but the passage of time made it impossible to fully prove, and could find no evidence to prove anyone else did.
World Press Photo said its probe found that two other photographers — Nguyen Thanh Nghe, the man mentioned in “The Stringer,” and Huynh Cong Phuc — “may have been better positioned” to take the shot.
“We conclude that the level of doubt is too significant to maintain the existing attribution,” said Joumana El Zein Khoury, executive director of World Press Photo. “At the same time, lacking conclusive evidence pointing definitively to another photographer, we cannot reassign authorship, either.”
World Press Photo, an organization whose awards are considered influential in photography, won’t attempt to recover the cash award given to Ut, a spokeswoman said.
Ut’s lawyer, James Hornstein, said his client hadn’t spoken to World Press Photo after some initial contact before “The Stringer” was released. “It seems they had already made up their mind to punish Nick Ut from the start,” he said.
Gary Knight, a producer of “The Stringer,” is a four-time judge of the World Press Photo awards and a consultant to the World Press Photo Foundation.
The AP said Friday that its standards “require proof and certainty to remove a credit and we have found that it is impossible to prove exactly what happened that day on the road or in the (AP) bureau over 50 years ago.”
“We understand World Press Photo has taken different action based on the same available information, and that is their prerogative,” the statement said. “There is no question over AP’s ownership of the photo.”
Meanwhile, the Pulitzer Prize that Ut won for the photo appears safe. The Pulitzers depend on news agencies who enter the awards to determine authorship, and administrator Marjorie Miller — a former AP senior editor — pointed to the AP’s study showing insufficient proof to withdraw credit. “The board does not anticipate future action at this time,” she said Friday.


BBC apologizes to Trump over speech edit but rejects defamation claim

BBC apologizes to Trump over speech edit but rejects defamation claim
Updated 14 November 2025

BBC apologizes to Trump over speech edit but rejects defamation claim

BBC apologizes to Trump over speech edit but rejects defamation claim
  • Trump team demanded compensation, apology
  • Broadcaster says it has no plans to rebroadcast documentary

LONDON: The British Broadcasting Corporation sent a personal apology to US President Donald Trump on Thursday but said there was no legal basis for him to sue the public broadcaster over a documentary his lawyers called defamatory.
The documentary, which aired on the BBC’s “Panorama” news program just before the US presidential election in 2024, spliced together three parts of Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021, when his supporters stormed the Capitol. The edit created the impression he had called for violence.
“While the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited, we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim,” the broadcaster said in a statement.
Lawyers for the US president threatened on Sunday to sue the BBC for damages of up to $1 billion unless it withdrew the documentary, apologized to the president and compensated him for “financial and reputational harm.”

No plans to rebroadcast
By asserting that Trump’s defamation case lacks merit, the BBC effectively signaled that it believes his claim for financial damages is equally untenable. But the broadcaster did not directly address Trump’s financial demand.
In its statement, the BBC said Chair Samir Shah on Thursday “sent a personal letter to the White House making clear that he and the corporation were sorry for the edit.” Shah earlier in the week apologized to a British parliamentary oversight committee and said the edit was “an error of judgment.”
British culture minister Lisa Nandy said on Friday it was right that the BBC had apologized to Trump.
“They’ve rightly accepted that they didn’t meet the highest standards and that’s the basis on which the chairman of the board has offered this apology to the President of the United States,” she told Times Radio. In its statement on Thursday, the BBC added that it has no plans to rebroadcast the documentary on any of its platforms.
Earlier on Thursday, the BBC said it was looking into fresh allegations, published in The Telegraph newspaper, over the editing by another of its programs, “Newsnight,” of the same speech.
The BBC has been thrown into its biggest crisis in decades after two senior executives resigned amid allegations of bias, including about the edit of Trump’s speech. The claims came to light because of a leaked report by a BBC standards official.
Founded in 1922 and funded largely by a license fee paid by TV-watching Britons, the BBC is without a permanent leader as the government weighs how it should be funded in the future.
It is a vital instrument of Britain’s “soft power” globally. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Wednesday that he believed in a “strong and independent” BBC.