Check out the story featured on CNN.com. The photo that BD Williams received in a letter is that of a real-life murderred boy. The family did not give permission and does not know how/why it was used. ABC does not know either, but is removing it in any rebroadcast.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/17844042/detail.html

OMG! I really would like to know how something like that just... "happens?"

That is really bizarre. Makes you wonder where they get other photos and things that they use.

That truly is bizarre. Also very suspicious if you ask me...hmm.

"First, who gave them permission to use his picture? Second, I'm glad I don’t watch this kind of mess -- soap operas -- because if I had seen Christopher's picture on there, I would have gone nuts," Rodriquez said.

Would she have preferred it if a sitcom had illegally used a picture of her grandson? Game show, talk show, reality show? Sesame Street?

That truly is bizarre. Also very suspicious if you ask me...hmm.

Would she have preferred it if a sitcom had illegally used a picture of her grandson? Game show, talk show, reality show? Sesame Street?

ITA! I think she's overreacting...

That's weird, terrible, irresponsible... Someone must have clipped this photo and thrown it in with a box of stock photos or something. I see casting calls for stock photo shoots every day. Say I book a stock photo shoot, I get like $150-$300 or so for the shoot, but then the photog or company owns that image, not me. I get no residuals for its use, and it can be sold to any number of companies (think of those random pictures you see attached to stories on AOL's homepage for example). I can't help but think that this poor little boy's photo ended up in a file with similar copyright clear photos.

Soap Opera Makes the Biggest Screw Up -- Ever

Posted Oct 30th 2008 12:49PM by TMZ Staff

The following story is one of the worst mistakes ever made in television history -- involving stupidity, a major soap opera, and a 6-year-old boy who was kidnapped, raped and murdered back in 2007.

It's all over a photo that was used in a recent episode of the SOAPnet show "General Hospital: Night Shift" -- Billy Dee Williams' character received a letter and a picture from the son he abandoned. But the photo wasn't of another actor -- it was Christopher Barrios, the victim of that horrible tragedy we mentioned earlier in this post.

Members of Christopher's fam -- who never authorized the use of a photo -- were furious and told NewsJax4.com they had no idea how the pic got on the show. The people at SOAPnet and their parent network ABC were just as stumped.

The network did, however, issue a statement apologizing and vowed to run a series of public service announcements in Christopher's honor to raise awareness of missing and exploited children -- thus putting an end to the most dramatic event in soap opera history.

http://www.tmz.com/2008/10/30/soap-opera-m...-screw-up-ever/

Would she have preferred it if a sitcom had illegally used a picture of her grandson? Game show, talk show, reality show? Sesame Street?

Oh please. The show used her MURDERED grandson's picture without permission, she can say whatever the hell she wants.

Tragic NIGHT SHIFT Snafu

ABC/SOAPNET has issued an apology for a heartbreaking mistake made in the Oct. 14 episode of GH: NIGHT SHIFT where Toussaint studied a photo of his long-lost son. The prop photo chosen was that of 6-year-old Christopher Barrios, who was kidnapped and murdered in 2007. "We offer our deepest condolences to the Barrios family for their loss, and our sincerest apologies for any pain caused by our mistake," said a statement from the networks. SOAPnet will be running PSAs to raise awareness about missing and exploited children and will permanently edit out the photo from the episode

http://www.soapoperadigest.com/news/breaking/

ITA! I think she's overreacting...

I take back my comment about her overreacting. She has every right to be angry.

I am really curious to know how they obtained it before I make a judgement on what where they thinking area.

They could of gotten the picture from the stock thing someone else mentioned.

I am really curious to know how they obtained it before I make a judgement on what where they thinking area.

They could of gotten the picture from the stock thing someone else mentioned.

That's what I'm thinking. Honestly, I do not imagine any higher-ups doing something *that* wrong. I just don't see it. If they had known about the child, I have to believe that they wouldn't have used that picture. Especially if they knew that they didn't have the legal rights to do it. I know that people will say anything in times of grief (I've been there), but the way she worded that to me is as if she's saying..."Well...I don't watch the damn things and HERE IS WHY, because they selfishly and illegally use pictures of murdered children!"

I don't think there was any malicious intent here...

And she should certainly be angry, but I think directing anger at these people without knowing how or why they got the picture is a little hasty. Seeking legal action would be a little exploitative, IMO.

Edited October 30, 200817 yr by All My Shadows

Wow. This is the biggest eff up ever made.

That's what I'm thinking. Honestly, I do not imagine any higher-ups doing something *that* wrong. I just don't see it. If they had known about the child, I have to believe that they wouldn't have used that picture. Especially if they knew that they didn't have the legal rights to do it. I know that people will say anything in times of grief (I've been there), but the way she worded that to me is as if she's saying..."Well...I don't watch the damn things and HERE IS WHY, because they selfishly and illegally use pictures of murdered children!"

I don't think there was any malicious intent here...

And she should certainly be angry, but I think directing anger at these people without knowing how or why they got the picture is a little hasty. Seeking legal action would be a little exploitative, IMO.

You're twisting it around and putting words into her mouth, for whatever reason. She's saying she's glad she doesn't watch soap operas because if she did and had seen the boy's picture without warning, she would've gone nuts. "...Second, I'm glad I don’t watch this kind of mess -- soap operas -- because if I had seen Christopher's picture on there, I would have gone nuts," Rodriquez said. It's right there.

Honestly. Is our love and support for the genre so cold that the quote of someone who is clearly still in grief over her raped and murdered grandchild is judged and criticized -- all because she spoke down about the genre? Face it -- the rapid decline in ratings over the last 15 years proves that not as many people are as into soaps, if at all, as we are.

At the end of the day, it's not about where the picture was used (Night Shift, Sesame Street, Law and Order), or the genre (daytime, primetime, children's programming, etc.) -- it was about the fact that she's thankful that it happened on something she DOESN'T watch, so she wasn't blindsided.

Like I said, I'm not judging Night Shift, either. I hope we do find out how this happened. Even if it was either lack of knowledge of who this boy was, or a mistake in judgment in using this boy's photo knowing exactly who he was... I hope we find out.

You're twisting it around and putting words into her mouth, for whatever reason. She's saying she's glad she doesn't watch soap operas because if she did and had seen the boy's picture without warning, she would've gone nuts. "...Second, I'm glad I don’t watch this kind of mess -- soap operas -- because if I had seen Christopher's picture on there, I would have gone nuts," Rodriquez said. It's right there.

Honestly. Is our love and support for the genre so cold that the quote of someone who is clearly still in grief over her raped and murdered grandchild is judged and criticized -- all because she spoke down about the genre? Face it -- the rapid decline in ratings over the last 15 years proves that not as many people are as into soaps, if at all, as we are.

At the end of the day, it's not about where the picture was used (Night Shift, Sesame Street, Law and Order), or the genre (daytime, primetime, children's programming, etc.) -- it was about the fact that she's thankful that it happened on something she DOESN'T watch, so she wasn't blindsided.

Like I said, I'm not judging Night Shift, either. I hope we do find out how this happened. Even if it was either lack of knowledge of who this boy was, or a mistake in judgment in using this boy's photo knowing exactly who he was... I hope we find out.

You're right. I don't know...I think that line just jumped at me as her trying to blame something that really doesn't deserve the blame because honestly, I don't think this is a situation where anyone should be blamed. It had to have been a mistake, it just had to have been one. If not...well then the person responsible should definitely be out of a job.

I am really curious to know how they obtained it before I make a judgement on what where they thinking area.

They could of gotten the picture from the stock thing someone else mentioned.

IMO a staffer was told to get a photo of a bout that looked like BDW and instead of buying a model photo they wnet through the net and took this photo. Maybe they didn't even read the story.