PHOTOS - Does the WTS change them?

by hamsterbait 44 Replies latest jw friends

  • free2beme


    I always thought the woman in that photo was very cute. Isn't that in the Paradise book?

  • Darth Yhwh
    Darth Yhwh
    I used to think it was some hottie JW from around New York City or something.

    Dan the man, thats exactly what I thought. Bottom line is the WBTS will and does change anything they deem necessary.

  • Leolaia

    Are we sure that the WTS did purchase the pic? In the case of the liquor ad, they did not pay to use the image and the agency responsible for the ad was rather upset about it.

  • garybuss

    You wrote: "Are we sure that the WTS did purchase the pic?"

    I'm positive I don't know. :-)

    Guess somebody needs to contact STERN magazine and ask them. Who is in the right country to do that?

  • Nomad

    I'm in the right country, but I can't imagine they'd have any records, such as invoices. In Germany, companies are required to archive their invoices for a max of 10 years.

  • Nomad

    Does anyone know the date on the Stern magazine?

  • BluesBrother

    This is all rather comical. The WTBTS is after all a big publishing company . They publish lots of pictures.

    Garybus's showing us the "Stern" pic is interesting and initially surprising, but really , why should they not use it, if it was acquired properly? We all know that they buy in a lot of pics. Any reader of a recent Awake , or viewer of the recent video about the Bible will see lots of commercial photos

    The "Revelation " that they update and alter some pics as time goes by is hardly earth shattering - so what? BTW we have all seen the Africanised pics in the African language versions of the lit. . Is that sinister as well?

  • PoppyR

    Personally I think it's FASCINATING. Might not be BIG news, but it's another little nail inthe coffin. The WTS always imply they use brothers etc for models and it's clear they dont. Very funny that in the initial pic the girl was naked (or appears to be) in the WT pic she has a modest vest top on... but is clearly more enticing!!! Thanks so much for this thread, I've found it really good.


  • PoppyR

    You know what else.. clearly these women are shown to be in some way responsible for misleading those poor angels! Look at the way the ones tht HAVE been drawn are depicted, it's adam and eve all over again!

    Poppy x

  • behemot

    In my country a few years ago there was the unwritten rule that skirts that were long to the shoes were not OK for sisters. Unfortunately in Brooklyn it seems that nobody knew about this, so once, much to the embarassment of the local branch that had upheld the rule, a WT issue came up that had on one page a pic of a sister preaching who had just such a skirt; and on another page a pic of a Witness party with a sister sitting on a sofa whose skirt covered her shoes. Result? The issue in the local language was printed with "edited" pics: the pic with the preaching sister was added an edge of greenery at the bottom so you could no longer see where the skirt ended; in the other pic they did a better job in that they actually shortened the skirt and added feet and shoes.

    Don't know if the changes were approved by the Headquarters or were an independent initiative of the branch committee. Anyway I saw the changes with my eyes as at the time I had access at the English issue of the magazines.


Share this