Extreme Makeover, Photoshop Edition

Manolo says, the peoples at the Media Bistro have discovered the disturbing example of how good looking is not good enough.

.

This it is ridiculousness itself!

The problem with the Katie, it is not that she is physically unattractive, indeed she is perfectly attractive. Rather the problem with the Katie it is that she seems to have the unattractive personality.

(via the Pundit of Instantness.)

34 Responses to “Extreme Makeover, Photoshop Edition”

  1. Daisy August 29, 2006 at 12:40 pm #

    I can certainly understand fixing the color, as in the first photo she appears to have spent the last six months on the all-carrot diet, but the waistline adjustment? To me, this does not say “serious newswoman who we are taking seriously”.

  2. eowyn_2 August 29, 2006 at 12:53 pm #

    There’s not just a waist adjustment. Her face and neck have been slimmed, her waist and hips look like 4-6″ were shaved off of her right side (her right, not mine), and several wrinkles have been smoothed. I think there’s even been a decrease in the bust size as well. Crazy.

  3. beloml August 29, 2006 at 1:10 pm #

    Maybe it’s Katie’s head on Ann-Marget’s body!

  4. Jen August 29, 2006 at 1:34 pm #

    They make her look like the Dragon Lady.

  5. Fausta August 29, 2006 at 1:42 pm #

    I think they’re giving her a hint

  6. Liz B. August 29, 2006 at 2:17 pm #

    I can’t decide what I’m more scared of: the blatant retouch job or that godawful all-I-need-is-the-clown-makeup smile. Perhaps she hasn’t heard that Heath Ledger was already cast as The Joker?

  7. anne August 29, 2006 at 2:17 pm #

    Oooh, this kind of photo manipulation burns me so bad. How are normal-sized women supposed to believe they are normal when even slim, beautiful media personalities are shown thinner than reality?

    Oughta be illegal.

    (grumble grumble)

  8. Sarah August 29, 2006 at 4:36 pm #

    I remember seeing within the past couple of years a strangely-tall Katie in a spread in a top fashion magazine. (My impression from TV is that she is about average in height; Katie in the photograph looked like she was around 6 feet!) After looking it over carefully with a retired, semi-professional photographer, we decided that she must have been standing on a box with the long skirt arranged carefully around said box so that you couldn’t see it. Of course, the picture could have been photo-shopped instead.

  9. Ninjarina August 29, 2006 at 5:08 pm #

    Haha, that’s not nearly as bad as the nude spread that Britney Spears did for the August 2006 Harper’s Bazaar. As if pregnant women don’t already have enough body issues, sheesh.

    Katie Couric annoys the heck out of me but I do feel kinda sorry for her – imagine having to wake up at 4 AM almost every morning for all those years.

  10. Sarah August 29, 2006 at 5:08 pm #

    I showed the pictures to another individual in the house, and he commented that “she had been to a shrink!” (Giggle!)

  11. MR August 29, 2006 at 5:29 pm #

    Television news is watched mostly by us older folks and I don’t think it was a surprise that the dismal ratings at CBS started to improve when an older, respected Bob Schieffer replaced Dan “what’s the frequency Kenneth” Rather. Schieffer is probably twice the age of the suits at CBS who are still popping zits and thinking with their zippers open. Let’s all feel lucky the exec’s Photoshopped Katie and stopped short of naked news.

  12. whatwouldjanicedickinsondo August 29, 2006 at 6:53 pm #

    Ew, Instapundit?
    Manolo, did you sell your soul to Pyjamas Media?
    lame.

  13. Dani August 29, 2006 at 9:45 pm #

    Uh, whatwouldjanicedickinsondo, the appropriate thread for that comment would be several posts down. Which is not the same as saying that it’s an appropriate comment.

  14. D.L. McNair August 30, 2006 at 12:02 am #

    For me, it’s all about the presentation…..That pose, I just cannont wrap my mind around it. I mean, if she is giving the presentation of a serious news reporter the Polly-Ann-Aw-Shucks-Aren’t-I-So-Cute head bobble doesn’t work. The photoshop was a good idea. The t.v. promos that have been shown leading up to her debut have been kind of sight on. I hope the best though.

  15. VeddyVeddyBadAng August 30, 2006 at 8:17 am #

    I wish I had a full-time Photoshop retoucher to follow me around and modify how I looked at all times.

    Now I almost like Katie, now that I can see she’s approaching “average” size!

  16. kim August 30, 2006 at 8:44 am #

    So glad CBS News is taking their new serious news anchor so seriously. Katie must feel so supported. Working in news is a very nurturing career with higher-ups taking care of their own, so this really surprises me. Ahem.

  17. Dani August 30, 2006 at 10:49 am #

    It’s sad to think how far TV news has plummeted since the days of Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Chancellor and Walters. Serious people reporting on serious things. Now we get talking heads and people talking over one another. Sigh.

  18. Daisy August 30, 2006 at 12:18 pm #

    News of the Manolo: You heard it here first!
    Those Johnny-come-latelys at CNN clearly know where to look for their stories:
    http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/TV/08/30/tv.couric.alteredphoto.ap/index.html

  19. Never teh Bride August 30, 2006 at 1:30 pm #

    I’m not surprised that they shrunk her body since that’s a common practice. BUT THEY SHRUNK HER HEAD!!!!!!

  20. Omnibus Driver August 30, 2006 at 2:15 pm #

    And this is why the Omnibus Driver, she adores the Manolo. Muy simpatico, we are!

  21. Eric Wilner August 30, 2006 at 8:02 pm #

    Eowyn_2, Never teh Bride: not only did they slim her waist, hips, and head; they also slimmed the logo on the wall behind her. It’s subtle, but the logo is definitely narrower in the new-improved picture.
    This suggests the slimming was done the easy way: by tweaking the aspect ratio of the entire photo, thereby making everyone and everything thinner and/or taller.

  22. toad August 30, 2006 at 8:02 pm #

    I kind of like the Brit approach. No Anchors, but Readers. A bit less show biz with my news please.

  23. baldilocks August 30, 2006 at 8:03 pm #

    Katie’s only sin in the original photo: not wearing a slip.

  24. Frank August 30, 2006 at 8:13 pm #

    I’ll bet Al Roker fell off his chair laughing when he saw it…

  25. dave August 30, 2006 at 8:18 pm #

    I was wondering why Katie Couric’s head was on Wynona Ryder’s body. Fake but accurate, indeed!

  26. docweasel August 30, 2006 at 8:33 pm #

    Ninjarina said:
    “imagine having to wake up at 4 AM almost every morning for all those years.”

    aw poor baby, for the millions she made she had to get up early. I get up at 5am for the past 10 years and I’d happily trade that other hour for 1/100th of the money she made.

    She’s a despicable human being, luckily network news is a rotting corpse. She may be the last of the high-profile anchors before the networks leave the nightly news to the scrapheap of history.

  27. jaed August 30, 2006 at 8:46 pm #

    This suggests the slimming was done the easy way: by tweaking the aspect ratio of the entire photo

    Nah. Take a look at the gap between arm and waist. That gap is considerably larger in the second picture, indicating the waist was “taken in” the hard(er) way. It also looks like they got rid of the bump on her left hip caused where her jacket ends.

    But someone mentioned that the first picture looked stretched out by about 6%. I’m not sure what’s up with that, but it would account for the logo being wider.

  28. 4virginia August 30, 2006 at 9:02 pm #

    the katie now has the torso of the condelezza, that would make the female neo-con

  29. Vulgorilla August 30, 2006 at 9:07 pm #

    If the network has to do this to pictures of their anchor, that should tell you what they are going to do with the news and any video/photos. No thanks … I’m just fine.

  30. Otto August 30, 2006 at 9:48 pm #

    Max Headroom…paging Max Headroom…

  31. nkbudl August 31, 2006 at 5:43 am #

    I saw Katie at a restaurant at least ten years ago and she was quite short. . . I’m 5’2″ and she seemed to be shorter than I! But then, I guess if one is a liberal, he can be whatever height he chooses and the driveby (anti-truth) media will support him.

  32. Jenzilla August 31, 2006 at 9:04 am #

    Right on, nkbudl! Those damn liberals are always lying about their height! The scum, how dare they mislead the public about their true measurements!

  33. Da Coyote August 31, 2006 at 10:47 am #

    Agree with the remark on her figure vs personality. I don’t care about the figure. I do care about the fact that she is a simpering, not very smart, stereotypical progressive type. Methinks CBS will have a hit on their hands – for about three weeks. It’ll take her about that long to lapse into Cronkiteisms or Ratherisms….mainly due to the fact that she has about the same intellect (or lack thereof) as the two previous anchor bimboys.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks:

  1. Almost There… « Obi’s Sister - August 31, 2006

    […] ’s an awfully big responsibility to put on someone’s shoulders. No matter how photo-shopped they are. […]