What struck me though upon first seeing this wasn't the issue of what Jesus may or may not have looked like, but the fact that this face was first created and publicised on a BBC TV series almost 15 years ago, called Son of God:
What the media have done this week though is clocked that the pic had randomly started going viral after being posted on a website, probably something to do with it being Jesus' supposed birthday month, and have then all jumped aboard in reporting on the image as if it were a fresh story, omitting the fact that it was old news even 10 years ago.
A few examples from the usual culprits:
THE DAILY EXPRESS
In this case it wasn't outright lies being peddled, but the lower rungs of the press being extremely disingenuous with the truth in the relentless quest for 'viral' shareable content.
Makes me sadder than usual to be a journalist when this is what the playing field is like these days.
(And coincidentally after my first visit to Jerusalem last month was blighted by another shit journo).
I've sent this to the writers of the above tabloid pieces and await their response, which I'll add in postscript should they arrive.
*postscript: None of the writers have responded, but you can tweet them at:
@SamWebbwriter (Sam Webb, Mirror)
@jonaustinjourn1 (Jon Austin, Express)
@richardhp (Richard HP, Metro)
Liked this? Read this: Jimmy Savile: the worst case of hypocrisy in The Sun's history?