Snowclone: We Will Not Use Photoshop In The Future

I think the name of this trope should be changed, it's far too limiting. Why not call it something more related to general forgery? It would allow for many more examples of how people in fiction can be fooled so easily by falsified information. It might also help to remove The Future from the title since it also restricts examples. Perhaps it should just be called Can't Spot A Fake.

You have good points, there.

Cant Spot A Fake sounds like a great idea for the name of the trope, although we'd probably have to alter the title a bit in order to explain that fictional character in general accept all photographs and videos in general, not necessarily only specific characters.

Cant Spot A Fake is way to general and ambiguous.

Aye, while I like a rename, that particular suggestion is not that good.

Assumed Genuine Unless Plot Relevant?

Well, as a conversation starter, it's good for that, but otherwise, yeah

As for , it's a pretty clear name, but it just seems clumsy rolling off the tongue for me. I'll say that would be my second choice if we can't come up with abetter name

Would irony (i.e. something like Evidence Never Lies — but probably not that exactly) come through, or is that playing with fire?

Falsification Proof Evidence if we want to have it broader than photoshopping.

Crowner's hooked.

I am suspicious of cases to rename that are not accompanied by evidence. (I don't understand why this thread was opened at all. I thought the whole approval system was implemented in part to avoid posts that basically amount to the author's opinion that something should be different than it is.)

The OP is actually arguing that the definition/description should be broadened, not the name, though I disagree with that also. It is specifically about photographs; image manipulation is a thing in itself, and "fictional characters often trust photographic evidence even though that's easy to fake" is a trope in itself, without including other kinds of evidence.

A supertrope about any documentation of any kind not being questioned should be a new article that starts with YKTTW, rather than changing an existing article.

edited 5th Jul '14 6:04:27 PM by rodneyAnonymous

"in the future" is happening in the present.

There's a difference between:

1. A fake picture is assumed to be genuine (because the plot requires people to be fooled).
2. The authenticity of a genuine picture is not questioned on-screen (Conservation of Detail).
3. In a high-tech future or magical setting, producing fake pictures is trivially easy but somehow people still accept pictures as evidence.

The name fits the last one.

^^^I am guessing that the thread was opened because the usage isn't that great and the name is fairly long.

Do either of those things justify little or no objective information in the OP? I mean, the first sentence is "I think the name of this trope should be changed, it's far too limiting." Jeez. Last time I checked, "why not" was one of the worst possible lines of reasoning to support a rename.

edited 9th Jul '14 11:44:57 AM by rodneyAnonymous

No consensus to rename.

...so what now?

I do not see any reason to leave this open any longer. OK, maybe to alphabetize and namespace everything but that doesn't need a Repair Shop.

"...so what now?"

Nothing. If you think some edits might improve the article, go for it, but please don't change the definition.