In this reading, Berger reminds us the distance at which we are infact viewing what we are seeing. He explains that what we see will always be distorted especially in the advent of cameras. The reproduction he mentions is never really the original. Specifically he references art and the ability for a large number of people to have access to it, given the technology we have. I took what he talked about to mean that with reproduction and the ability to mass reproduce leads to a change in the meaning of the subject. It there then becomes easy to take the art and relate it to other experiences the viewer has had. This however, lends itself to a singular perspective on the art.
To take his ideologies beyond the reproduction of art. The internet has been extremely successful at reproducing any type of visual work. However, this of course can lend itself to a host of issues. It is not limited to visual work. If I were to consider the root of a lot of content I see on a daily basis, I am confident I will that much of it, visual or informational has been distorted. I believe this is reflected in the recently coined term "fake news".