who has this job anyway?

So I cruised to cnn.com and saw the images below with their headline, and my first thought was this: "Who gets to pick which photos to display?"


OK, the photo of Obama looking happy and triumphant, even dare we say presidential... sure. No-brainer. But who decided on the photo of Clinton? Let's forget for the moment that they chose to leave her name from the headline and refer to her in a context of "she's not doing what she should be doing." Let's forget Dr. Lynette Long's claim that CNN is a bunch of chauvinists. (Dr. Long has not yet replied to my email, btw.)

These pictures are worth well more than 2,000 words. I mean, look at the Senator on the right. Face downcast. Eyes closed. A total look of "I've just been beat, but I have to keep my composure" on her face. My guess is there's a photo editor at cnn.com that's been holding on to this one for just this occasion. But who has that job? It's a job that has a huge amount of subtle power to it, the power to create context and connotation, to define an entire personality or event, to bias a reader in ways the reader is unlikely even to notice, let alone understand.

Even though the photo is, in truth, just one instant out of thousands in Clinton's day, the chosen image becomes what she is for millions of cnn.com readers. When they think of Clinton, that image will come to mind. And someone at cnn.com chose it over an image that displayed confidence, cheerfulness, courage, and, dare we say, presidentialness? (Presidentiality? Whatever.)

Every day I become more convinced that Media Literacy should be a required part of the public school curriculum no later than 6th grade, and continuing through high school. People should be aware of how they are being manipulated.

(PS for full disclosure: I've become an Obama supporter in the past few months, but I'd happily vote for Clinton in November if she had won instead.)