![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/fake-photo-1912-800x420.jpg\")
A fake 1912 photograph of Theodore Roosevelt on a moose that was published by the New-York Tribune. <\/p>\n A fake 1912 photograph of Theodore Roosevelt on a moose that was published by the New-York Tribune. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s easy to imagine that anxiety over manipulated images began with Photoshop or AI,<\/a> but photographers have been wrestling with the problem almost since the birth of the medium. More than a century ago (113 years back to be exact), the U.S. faced a scandal over doctored images of the president, and the outrage nearly led to a national ban on fake photos.<\/p>\n In 1912, a U.S. senator actually introduced a bill aimed, in his words, \u201cto prohibit the making, showing or distributing of fraudulent photograph,\u201d according to a fascinating piece by FreeThink<\/a> which first surfaced this long-forgotten legislative attempt at regulating analog image manipulation.<\/p>\n A Long History of \u2018Fake\u2019 Photography <\/p>\n Victorian photography was full of visual trickery. Headless portraits<\/a> and spirit photographs<\/a> created with double exposures, and other staged marvels fascinated viewers \u2014 and fooled many of them. These techniques were considered clever at the time, but they also laid the groundwork for distrust. Eventually, retouching soon became routine in portrait studios, where photographers reshaped faces or softened features by working directly on negatives or glass plates.<\/a><\/p>\n By the turn of the 20th century, FreeThink notes that photography was starting not to be seen as a trusted or neutral medium. In 1897, the New-York Tribune bluntly declared<\/a> that the long-held idea that \u201cPhotographs Do Not Lie\u201d had collapsed. The paper warned that the rise of retouching<\/a> \u2014 via the \u201cskillful work of the negative\u201d \u2014 meant photography was \u201cnow made to suit the fancy of the inordinately vain.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe old saying that \u2018photographs do not lie\u2019 must go to join the growing host of exploded notions,\u201d the New-York Tribune wrote. \u201cIt may have been true when photography was new and undeveloped, but the fact remains that at the present time photographs may be and are made to lie with great frequency and facility. The methods by which this result is accomplished are more various and extensive than most persons suspect.\u201d<\/p>\n And just like today\u2019s AI image or deepfake-based scams, manipulated photos were already being used for blackmail. Reports from the era describe everything from the circulation of fake nude portraits of wealthy women in Chicago in 1891 to \u201cindecent trick photographs\u201d circulated \u201cfor the purposes of blackmail\u201d in 1905.<\/p>\n When a Fake Presidential Photo Pushed Washington Too Far <\/p>\n However, by 1911, photo fakery had reached the nation\u2019s capital. Small shops in Washington, D.C., began selling novelty prints that placed tourists beside the then U.S. President William Taft. The images were initially harmless souvenirs, but federal officials took notice. A U.S. attorney ordered the businesses to cease the practice, and a subsequent request to continue \u2014 submitted to the White House \u2014 was denied. But the mounting pressure ultimately forced the novelty photo operation to shut down.<\/p>\n The situation took a darker turn the following year. Authorities discovered a similar doctored Taft portrait in the possession of a man wanted for human trafficking. Reports said he used the manufactured presidential photo to win the confidence of his victims and suddenly, fake images became a national concern.<\/p>\n The Justice Department drafted legislation to outlaw fake photos, and Senator Henry Cabot Lodge agreed to carry it forward after allegedly seeing a doctored photo of himself with someone he had never met. On July 29, 1912, Senator Lodge introduced a bill<\/a> that would make it a crime to create or distribute any \u201cfraudulent or untrue photograph, or picture purporting to be a photograph\u201d without the approval of the person depicted. Punishments could reach six months in jail or fines up to $1,000 \u2014 roughly $31,800 today.<\/p>\n Newspapers across the country paid attention. Pennsylvania\u2019s Intelligencer Journal supported the measure and slammed the \u201cmiserable business of creating fake photographs.\u201d The paper admired photography as a \u201cwonderful art\u201d but argued it was \u201cmanifestly in need of control against abuse.\u201d Negatives \u201cartfully combined to tell pictorial lies\u201d were labeled \u201cphotographic crimes,\u201d capable of being accepted as truth because they looked \u201capparently faithful and exhibited as the testimony of the innocent sun.\u201d<\/p>\n Not everyone agreed. Some photographers felt the law was too broad and would expose professionals to endless lawsuits. In 1912, the publication American Photography reportedly dismissed the proposal as \u201cindefensible,\u201d warning that it would leave photographers and publishers \u201ccontinually liable to blackmailing suits.\u201d<\/p>\n ![\"Two](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/retouching-1985-800x450.jpg\")
An example of retouching a photograph via negatives in the late 19th century. (Public Domain) <\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Edwardian_or_Victorian_photoshopped_photograph-1-550x800.jpg\")
In this photograph, taken around 1900, this image was said to have been \u2018edited\u2019 by painting over the sitters waist, in hopes it makes their waist appear smaller. (Public Domain\/ Wikimedia Commons<\/a>)<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/1912-bill-800x511.jpg\")
The 1912 bill to ban fake photographs (via FreeThink) <\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/fakes-pres.jpg\")
The fake photographs of the presidential candidates published by the New-York Tribune in 1912. <\/p>\n