ISN'T it a shame that a common response to this week's amazing photo of a weasel riding on the back of a woodpecker was: "It must be fake".

Amateur photographer Martin Le-May captured the extraordinary shot while walking in a country park. He posted it online and the picture went viral, being retweeted several thousand times on social media.

Time was when no one would have doubted the authenticity of such a photograph. But today, when even the simplest of smartphones have photo-editing modes, it's hard to believe the old maxim that the camera never lies.

The debate even drew TV wildlife presenter Steve Backshall out from his usual hiding spot (probably from behind a tree in the Amazonian rainforest) to declare that while the incident was an unusual occurrence, it was not totally unheard of, and that he had "no reason to doubt" the photo.

And neither have I. However, we are right to be sceptical about images portrayed by others. From the glossiest magazine shoots of the hottest A-lister to the latest postings by friends on Facebook, we should be asking ourselves if seeing is believing.

The digital revolution has turned us all into photographers, and technology allows us to punch above our technical weight. Photoshop and its ilk tempts us to tamper with our shots, adjusting the lighting, sharpening the focus and erasing the unwanted, whether that be red eye, wrinkles or our bulging waistline.

Just look at the rise of the selfie. It wouldn't be possible without the wizardry in our smartphones which are not only programmed to take the best photo possible in the circumstances, but also allow us make it even better. Want smoother skin, more flattering light, bigger eyes and a thinner face – your every wish is just a swipe away.

I'll admit to having some fun with the camera in my new phone: within moments my selfie which records my uneven skin tone, baggy eyes and fine lines is transformed into the image of a porcelain doll as drawn by a Japanese Manga artist. OK, I've exaggerated the result to make my point, but the ease at which we can alter images raises moral questions for all of us.

Our selfie culture is the inevitable result of our love affair with social media, which seduces us into presenting our own perfectly manicured lives to the world. Have you ever posted an ugly picture of yourself online. Come to think of it, have any of your friends?

We're all complicit in this fantasy, and our camera phones make it all too easy to take part.

Now here's a thought. What if we refused to play ball. What if for 24 hours we all told the truth: posted online pictures of us as we are, spots and all, and updated our status with how we are really feeling?

OK, I'll go first. Status update: My back is killing me, I'm fed up doing housework and the car needs to go into the garage again, which probably means I'm going to bust my overdraft.

Why not join me on Twitter: #RealMeForTheDay.
 

• HAVE you noticed the return of the "love locks" on York's Millennium Bridge?

The locks, which are often initialled then attached to the bridge in a public sign of a couple's commitment, follows a tradition that began in Paris on the Pont des Arts.

City of York Council removed 300 of the love locks last spring on health and safety grounds in the wake of a section of the Pont des Art buckling and falling off under the weight of thousands of locks.

But it seems that true romance will not be thwarted and the locks have began appearing again.

Down in Somerset, conservationists are having another cat-and-mouse game with the public over tiny "fairy" doors appearing at the foot of trees in Wayford Woods, Crewkerne.

The doors are being installed by local people, so children can leave messages for fairies. Some 200 have appeared, leading to the area being dubbed the "fairy woods".

Trustees are now turning into good-taste/bad-taste cops and patrolling the woods to remove garish additions made from plywood and anything tinsel.

Away with the fairies, or what?