There’s something to be said for composition.
Peter Roskam, the Illinois Republican congressman and deputy majority whip, said the front page makes Ryan look like the “son of Satan.”
The picture is taken to make him look small, weak, young, dominated by mysterious shadowy figures with a red background. It’s made to look sinister, with Ryan being the puppet, the pawn, the figurehead, altogether weak and subject to the domination of the diabolical suits behind him in the darkness. It’s taken from an angle that shows weakness, that cuts off his body, destroying any poise or presence he has. It’s a masterful piece of propaganda.
Contrast to this:
It’s a picture that puts the current media darling in a very, very positive light. The picture is taken from below, from a position that makes him superior, larger than life. It gives him a big, powerful, commanding presence. For those who see through the chicanery, it makes the viewer see it as a media hack-job that’s unknowing self-parody. They think he’s a wizard.
Obama with halos as the Chicago Jesus isn’t new. But it’s worth it to show the contrast.
Or even “Obama Reflecting”… otherwise known as “Obama counting ceiling tiles”. It’s still not a bad picture, it shows thought, dignity, and the stresses of the presidency upon the wisest, greatest man who ever lived in the history of ever.
And let’s not forget Obama the gay Jesus:
Now, scroll back up and take a look at the picture of Paul Ryan. He delivered this speech last night, and it was a good, solid speech that made a lot of good points. His presence is nothing like the picture the NYT chose to run, but they’re choosing to make it that way.
It would be like running this picture for every mention of Obama, a photo met with derision and hatred by the mainstream media:
Photography and composition says a lot, and it says a lot about what the media chooses to run with, doesn’t it?