I find that the previous comments regarding this mission are somewhat lacking in veracity/ knowledge. Why would the mission scientists need to 'doctor' images? What would this achieve? This is a very strange mindset.
The reason that the bright spots are interpreted as ice is due to the fact that every bright spot investigated by the instruments has turned out to be ice. This is hardly news at comets. Have we already forgotten that the impact at Tempel 1 excavated several thousand tonnes of H2O ice, as seen by various spacecraft? And the veritable 'snowstorm' around Hartley 2, which featured prominently in news reports a few years ago? These were not guessed to be ice. It was spectroscopically resolved as being ice. Ice has been seen numerous times on 67P, including CO2 ice. People don't make this up for fun, you know.
I would suggest that the posters of the previous comments try searching the scientific literature, on both 67P and Ceres, before making such ill informed posts on such matters in future. If they would like references to the findings to back up what I have said, I would be happy to provide them. If, however, they believe that the whole of the cometary science community is part of some giant conspiracy to cover up a crazy hypothesis, that I hadn't heard of until a few days ago, then I suppose that I would be wasting my time providing such references. We all might as well believe that the moon is made of Swiss cheese, and NASA are covering up that fact. Makes about as much sense.