NY Times Crops Bush Out Of Selma Picture, Highlights Ferguson

[Locutus]

your moral and intellectual superiors.

On the 50th anniversary of the march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, The New York Times chose a front page picture of President Barack Obama, his family, and civil rights leaders who were there at the time. Missing from the photo, though only a few people down to the right, were former President George W. Bush and his wife Laura. The Times also focused quite a bit of their story on the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, even though the local and federal investigations into that event found race had zero role in it and they refused to bring charges.


For their front page, the Times curiously chose a picture that did not show the entire front line of marchers, choosing instead to leave the Bushes on the cutting room floor.


Here is the front page of the Times:

more


NY Times Crops Bush Out Of Selma Picture, Highlights Ferguson | The Daily Caller



WSB-TVVerified account ‏@wsbtv From @jeffmason1: The Obama family and Bush family join marchers to cross Selma's Edmund Pettus Bridge.

 

[EagleSmack]

Stalin would be so very proud.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

It's not the same picture. People are looking in different directions.

 

[EagleSmack]

It's not the same picture. People are looking in different directions.

That is true but the NYT cropped Bush out completely.

Knowing the NYT it was done intentional.

 

[Cliffy]

Why is that scumbag Bush not in jail?

 

[EagleSmack]

huh?

 

[Nuggler]

It's not the same picture. People are looking in different directions.

some right, and some left.:lol:

huh?

He means, if you're going to the march bring Bush "along"............:roll:

 

[BaalsTears]

Why is that scumbag Bush not in jail?

Probably for the same reason Obama won't face charges.

 

[Sal]

:lol: lmfao

Shrub is missing aaaaaaaaaaaaw too bad, so sad

boo hoo

 

[Colpy]

That is true but the NYT cropped Bush out completely.

Knowing the NYT it was done intentional.

Not really.

From the right wing site The Blaze:

"But there’s a problem with the “cropping” narrative: No cropping actually took place.
“There was no crop,” Times’ photo editor Michele McNally said. “This was the photo as we received it.”
The Times photographer on the scene said he did get a picture that showed both Bush and Obama in the march but that he discarded it because it was overexposed.
The photographer, Doug Mills, said that the fact that Bush and Obama were walking far apart, plus the fact that Bush was in sunlight and Obama was in the shade, combined to make the picture with both presidents in it not very good.
Mills detailed the conditions to photo editors:

Just so you know … at the time the photo was taken, I was using a 70-200 long zoom lens. I also had a remote camera with a wide-angle lens attached to the side of the truck that took a photo at the just about the exact moment as the tighter one. As you can see, Bush was in the bright sunlight. I did not even send this frame because it’s very wide and super busy and Bush is super-overexposed because he was in the sun and Obama and the others are in the shade.
​

“Technically, it’s a bad picture, and [Mills] didn’t even send it,” McNally said, reiterating that Bush “was totally overexposed” and that the photo the Times wound up using was compositionally solid and “it has impact.”
In a blog post Monday, Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan defended the paper’s choice of picture.
“While it would have been moving and worthwhile to see both presidents in a front-page photograph, I see no evidence of politics in the handling or presentation of the photo,” she wrote."


A tempest in a teapot.

 

[Nuggler]

8O............A tempest in a teapot."

Nah, Colpy; no one really gives a shlt.

They should all move stage left till Shrub finds a pier. Tides out.

 

[Ludlow]

brilliant woman. salt of the earth

 

[gopher]

Since it is clear that Bush was not cropped out of the photo, Daily Caller needs to make a retraction.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

That is true but the NYT cropped Bush out completely.

Knowing the NYT it was done intentional.

But if it was not the same picture, the photographer could have chosen not to frame the Bush's in the shot.

They NYT did decide which picture to use and we can only speculate on the reason. But clearly they did not show the Bush's in the march. A shame as it would have made it a more bi-partisan story which is lacking in today's journalism.

Why is that scumbag Bush not in jail?

Let's take the topic in a completely new direction ....

 

[petros]

Why is that scumbag Bush not in jail?

Why aren't you in jail?

 

[gopher]

Funny how Daily Caller still hasn't made a retraction and posted the truth that a different photo was used.

 

[Cliffy]

Funny how Daily Caller still hasn't made a retraction and posted the truth that a different photo was used.

What? A right winger rag admit to tampering with the evidence to promote their hatred. Give yer head a shake eh!

 

[gopher]

What? A right winger rag admit to tampering with the evidence to promote their hatred. Give yer head a shake eh!

You got a point there, buddy.

 

[Locutus]

Since it is clear that Bush was not cropped out of the photo, Daily Caller needs to make a retraction.

Funny how Daily Caller still hasn't made a retraction and posted the truth that a different photo was used.

What? A right winger rag admit to tampering with the evidence to promote their hatred. Give yer head a shake eh!

You got a point there, buddy.

For their front page, the Times curiously chose a picture that did not show the entire front line of marchers, choosing instead to leave the Bushes on the cutting room floor.

don't be mad fellas.

 

[gopher]