Does EXIF Data Prove Trump Is Lying to America?

Does EXIF Data Prove Trump Is Lying to America?

I'm not one to write political articles, and I promise you this one isn't meant to be pro-Trump or anti-Trump. However, as photographers, we've been told that a photo is worth a thousand words. What if the words these photos replace tell a very different story?

I woke up this morning seeing a popular photography term trending on Twitter: EXIF. This acronym stands for "exchangeable image file format," and it is used to give standard terminology and reporting on digital files produced by digital cameras. Photographers are familiar with this data because it can tell us what aperture an image was shot at, the camera's shutter speed, the camera and lens model used for a particular photograph, and what time the images were taken. This was a strange term to see trending on a worldwide platform like Twitter, so you know I had to click on it.

What I found was two images released by the White House showing Donald Trump signing papers in the Walter Reed Hospital. The two images were released yesterday, and there was a lot of controversy around whether or not the hospitalized president was actually getting work done or if he and his staff had staged a fake photoshoot. With so much misinformation surrounding whether or not the sitting president is falling sick with COVID-19 or if his case is rather mild, images of him working and looking in good spirits are some of the few bits of information the outside public has on his potentially dire situation.

The bombshell that this new tweet exposes is that the two images were taken only 10 minutes apart. With Trump sitting in two different locations and in two completely different outfits, we have to ask ourselves how probable it would be for the president to appear in such radically different situations in such a short period of time? Below is the screen capture of the viral images showing the two timestamps from the EXIF data.

As you can see in the two red boxes I highlight, the EXIF says one image was taken at 5:25:59 PM, while the other was taken just 10 minutes later at 5:35:40 PM on October 3.

There are a few other interesting things the EXIF data from these images, as the two images below show. The first one is that the images are credited to White House photographer Joyce N. Boghosian. You can also see that the images were taken on a Sony ILCE-9 camera, which is also known as the Sony A9 mirrorless camera. The lens used for both images is the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses (shot wide open at ISO 3,200 for all you photo geeks reading).

Additional EXIF images of the images in question

When I saw these images, I had a little laugh to myself and thought: "yep, the White House seems to have been caught staging some photos of the president doing work while diagnosed with Coronavirus." I also thought that maybe this would be an interesting article for Fstoppers readers. And in writing this article, that's when a few strange things started popping up.

The first thing I wanted to do was create my own screen captures of the EXIF data so that I wouldn't have to use someone else's images in a fair use situation but also to double-check the authenticity of the images spewing around the internet. I tried to find the original published image, which is cited as coming from the White House, but I couldn't find it on Twitter.  "No worries," I thought. This image is posted everywhere on the internet.

None of the images I found online had EXIF data

After saving a few different copies of the two images, I noticed that none of them actually had any EXIF data attached to them. Many websites and social media platforms strip EXIF data in an effort to make files smaller, so that was expected. What I didn't expect was for every single image I threw into Photoshop to all have this data missing. Where could I find the original image used to create the viral set of bombshell EXIF images? How could I reproduce these myself?  Maybe the Joyce N. Boghosian, the White House photographer who took these images, would have them on her account. No such luck there either. This is a bit strange.

I decided to look a bit more into Joyce N. Boghosian to see if there were other clues. One string of tweets was showed Joyce taking the image of the event and people were complaining about her not wearing a mask while taking these photographs. I noticed that the woman in this photo wasn't using a Sony camera at all but instead had a Canon and Leica. It seemed strange that a press photographer would have more than one or two brands of cameras on them at any one time, and surely, they wouldn't use both Sony and Canon cameras with the same type of 70-200mm lens. And if this was a photo of Joyce as she took the shots of the stage, well, she didn't shoot them on Sony cameras at all. In trying to find out more about Joyce, I discovered that the photo above wasn't of Joyce photographing Trump at all but rather a tighter crop from her time working with President George Bush. So that was a bit of a dead-end too.

This photo shows Joyce more than a decade earlier

I finally found what I think are the original versions of the two images through the Associated Press. When thrown into Photoshop, I still cannot see all the data shown by the images posted on Twitter. I can confirm that the EXIF data in the file does show the same timestamps under the "Orgin" tab. However, there doesn't seem to be any copyright information or metadata tags at all. I'm not sure what to make of this; does my version of Photoshop not show the full EXIF data? Maybe some of the data was stripped from the smaller version of the image I downloaded from the Associated Press's website? Maybe Apple is a better operating system than Windows?

So, where does this all leave us? For me, I like to know the truth. As I've seen in our Coronavirus Journal, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. It seems the media outlets on both sides of the political spectrum like to edit and chop words to fit their own narrative. This is probably nothing new and has been happening ever since the beginning of the printing press. What is new is social media and the ability for every single person to have a voice and spread this so-called "news." Finding the truth in all of this noise has never been harder, and with the current pandemic still at hand, more and more people are getting on edge trying to understand what is actually happening in the world. Unfortunately, many have simply given up.

The other night, I watched a documentary on Netflix that has been recommended to me by many different people. The Social Dilemma is a documentary on how social media has quickly changed from being strictly a social platform to being a powerful system designed to enslave the human mind. The 90-minute documentary explores the creators of some of the largest social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, and Google. Without spoiling some of the topics they discuss, a few programmers believe that these relatively new platforms are simply too powerful to prevent the spread of misinformation. On one hand, having a limited number of powerful news agencies that are trusted with sharing the truth to the world is problematic; on the other hand, having billions of people replace that paradigm without any real sense of accountability is equally terrifying.

How does this all relate back to the EXIF data tweet I read about this morning? I want to give the whistleblowers the benefit of the doubt when it comes to when these two images were taken. Being the skeptic that I am, I also wanted to research it a little before coming up with my own conclusion. I do find the two images strange, and the White House has been cloaking the president's current COVID situation in a sea of non-transparency.  As another image has shown, even the items on the desk seem to point in the direction of the images being staged.  Some might ask if someone simply could have made up fake EXIF data and pushed them online to a mob of people foaming at the mouth to discredit the president? That doesn't seem to be the case since the times match from images anyone can download off the AP's website. Regardless of when the EXIF data tells us the images were taken, we are still left not completely knowing the context of what's happening in these photos themselves.  I think the truth lies somewhere between a photograph and a thousand words.

Is this more proof the images are staged?

I'm hoping Joyce Boghosian will speak up and give some insight into the EXIF data exposed in these tweets. Was her camera's internal clock set correctly? What happened in between those 10 minutes? As a photojournalist who has been documenting the daily activities of several presidents for decades now, I hope we can trust her to give us the truth. Whatever happens, this story could turn out to be one of the last big public relations disasters of the president during his term or it could be the opening saga in another four years of his presidency. Hopefully, the truth will come out from those actually present in the room when these images were taken.

Patrick Hall's picture

Patrick Hall is a founder of Fstoppers.com and a photographer based out of Charleston, South Carolina.

Log in or register to post comments
191 Comments
Previous comments

Consider this: if the White House photog changed their camera date settings to 2022 instead of 2020, then took a photo of Trump in the Oval Office, would the press then take that as proof from the future that a time traveler took a photo in the future of a reelected Trump?
If you start treating Exif data as some form of evidence, you'll start getting fooled by easily-manipulated Exif metadata...

Fake news

Does "Fake news" mean anything anymore?

Sure it means something. If it's from a Democrat it's fake news!

So you say it's a decision, not a fact. Thanks for the clarification.

Welcome.

Don’t you have anything better to do with your time??? Come on, man!

When you found the originals through the AP site, did you "save as" from a public-facing site or download them from the AP wire? The public-facing site would likely have stripped EXIF data, while the wire portal would preserve it.

I think there needs to be a refresher coarse on meta-data.

People who zoomed in on the paper he's signing also say that it's blank. Furthermore, he's holding a Sharpie marker, which is not commonly used for signing official documents.

I bet there are perfectly good explanations for the discrepancy, but lack of credibility and transparency of this administration has made everything questionable even when it shouldn’t.

Thanks for your thoughtful input. GOD save the Queen.

It is not at all uncommon for any administration to pose a president for photo ops. Particularly if a sitting president may be ill, it becomes imperative to project him in the best health possible in order to avoid panic and chaos among the people. Financial markets, foreign governments - both friend and foe, military installations, etc, all need to have the world believe that the president is firmly in control and US government leadership is neither weakened nor disarrayed as a result of his illness.

It is the job of the White House photographer to show the president as strong, healthy and in full control of his office to the best of their ability, At some point, should circumstances deteriorate and more unfortunate facts about his health become public, these types of images are no longer effective. However, I’m the interim the administration can buy a little bit of time and hope the circumstances improve.

This isn’t a conspiracy or anything of the kind. It is simply the game that is played as part of being a world leader intended to maintain order around the globe.

It was the Associated Press (specifically the AP's vice president and director of photography in 2013) that originally complained about the Obama administration using staged photos calling them "little more than propaganda"- and that criticism for an administration they otherwise adored. That is hardly a testament to accurate documentation.

Interesting article, but refresh my memory, when the AP ( that would be the Associated Press- as in journalists) were complaining about lack of media access and use of staged photography by the Obama administration from 2009- 2013 was there a similar concern here as there is over these two photos? Or were there just articles talking about how great the White House photographer was? I do not recall anyone feeling the need to "look a bit more into" him.

It's terrible, I'm pretty sure Nobody on this site has ever staged a photo to make a point or sell something right?

Was this a commercial?

Wow! Interesting. So how does chlorine taste like, just curious.

Attack? I'm just barely demonstrating that not everything is a commercial. Take it the way you decide to take it.

Pretty sure most have, and PR is a staged business where we should expect that to come with the territory.

Much ado about nothing.

Yes sir! This is right up there with Nixon's 18 minutes of missing tape recording. Ya' gotta' love TDS.

Both photos are posted to the AP images website with the Creation Date timestamps of 5:25pm and 5:35pm. So the issue becomes if the Associated Press is to be accused of deliberately falsifying the EXIF data.

http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Virus-Outbreak-Trump/a7c3c0a82ee8...
http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Virus-Outbreak-Trump/8e8f199636eb...

LMAO! If I was Trump I would stage it too. People are dumb and uneducated! I love it.

America is so polarized this will be a political thread.

deleted

Actually I downloaded the original image from the White House Flickr site and opened in GIMP. The EXIF data is there in full and is accurate. I will gladly send you the data it shows.

Image at 17:25:

Image at 17:35:

Hopefully Pence becomes POTUS.

hehe... fuck fake-news! :) the most vicious fakers are journalists and press-photographers: it's their profession... since times inmemorial (e.g. since photography was invented and used as media:))
the only digital addition is faking exif data and deep fake ai videos ...
the real problem with the actual case is, that all anti-trumpists obviously cannot fight trump on poltical issues (because esp. mr. biden in the past performed same/similar features:) but on that absolutely stupid details whether POTUS is realy ill or only superficially, if he fakes (sic!) his covid-infection or if he's about dying... that's the sad essence of this FAKED electoral fight/debate since trump was elected president...

The Big McDonalds statement on Twitter today:

"I will be leaving the great Walter Reed Medical Center today at 6:30 P.M. Feeling really good! Don’t be afraid of Covid. Don’t let it dominate your life. We have developed, under the Trump Administration, some really great drugs & knowledge. I feel better than I did 20 years ago!"

So staged it isn't even funny.
Or actually... it is funny. Seeing people support this joke for POTUS.
211k dead and counting.
Injecting chlorine, then bright light, drugs for COVID invented in the USA according to his public statement a few months ago with a doctor nearby ( gasping for air as she was suffocating from the silly things this idiot was saying ? )

Trump makes me laugh with his nicknames for Sleepy Joe, Mini Mike, Low Energy Jeb, Crooked Hillary, Slippery Comey, Sneaky Feinstein, Lightweight Gillibrand, Puppet Nancy, Cheatin' Obama, Crazy Bernie, Pencil Neck Adam Schiff, Elizabeth Warren as Pocahontas, and the list goes on. There are some insane people in politics and Trump laughs with it and drives them nuts. Trump cracks me up. Not necessarily the most professional way to run the White House, but in the end he does what important for United States. He has done so many wonderful things that he makes me proud, and I'm Canadian. I would trade our stupid Prime Minister Trudeau for Trump any day. Would love to have a guy like him in Canada. TRUMP 2020.

Sounds like you’d deserve him

Would you rely on a guy who tells you don't trust science but relies to extremes on science you can't even benefit from to save his own life? You don't need to answer, you made it clear. Have a good day.

To say you are righteous doesn't mean a thing, until you do the righteous thing. You don't need to answer. I suppose that's confusing to you.

I read Trudeau can be your prime minister for another 30 - 40 years. Now, I could be right or I could be wrong.

Indeed, Trump 2020. After that, looking forward to a Trump 2024.

Sarcasm will get you everywhere.

While you did this extensive photo exif report, Trump did got out of the Hospital, just saying.

So, I have a few things to say, not trying to be political, just using some common sense. 1. In the first photo, trump is seen with a suit jacket on, and in the second with out. So, saying that he is in completely different outfits is a bit of a stretch, he could have just taken the over coat off. 2. It shows 2 different locations, who knows how long Trump had been sitting in the first location, he could have just wanted to get more comfortable and move. 3. The big media seems to hate Trump, no matter what side you are on, you can see this. So, I'm saying that it could be a possibility of the media changing the EXIF, to make it look suspicious. I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just trying to show what could be possible.

More comments