Whether it’s out of laziness, a lack of resources, or a genuine conviction misrepresent a subject or story, photos and images are often ripped from their original context and placed into a new one to either fill in gaps or tell a new narrative.
The former can often be excused if the proper attribution and context is used to explain where the photo came from and what it relates to like this example from Vox here—
This explains that the photo was taken on a separate date and occasion and what that occasion was. Its application also makes sense as the article is about William Barr, but Barr himself was not present at the House Judiciary vote.
The use of this photo from Breitbart is an example of the latter. Breitbart doesn’t really attribute where the photo is from. It shows that it’s from AP Images, but outside of that we get no additional context. The photo is often made to look more saturated, which deepens the features on Theresa May’s face making what looks like a fairly neutral face in AP’s version of the story look more like a scowl.
The photo is used and digitally manipulated, divorced from its original context, to drive Breitbart’s narrative of malice and failure by creating an unflattering image of the UK prime minister. The article paints her as a stubborn, failed PM, who is holding her party back and uses this photo from another even to put readers in the right mindset for their slant before they even read the lead.
The Albany Observer 