From: "Bill Mattox" 

Some did, many didn't.

It would be interesting to see the ratio of published images if they
consisted of -- say -- one involving an emotionally charged action directed
against a politically correct racial minority (Cuban-American's obviously
do not fit this profile because they don't vote right) and one that
mitigated the first... especially if the mitigating image was obviously
staged.

One somewhat interesting distant example could be made of the Rodney King
video. The full video showed a much more aggressive King (persistently
lunging at officers) than the shorter clip that was played ad nauseum for
weeks, with the longer version almost NEVER being aired. The shorter
version played to the liberal media's desire to stereotypically portray
cops as racist and out of control, while the longer version softened this
to some extent by putting exactly what they were dealing with into
perspective.

"Bill Lucy"  wrote in message
news:MPG.136edae576fb6ab79897ce{at}news.barkto.com...
390505f4$1{at}w3.nls.net>, billy-m{at}pacbell.net says...
> > What I find striking is the mainstream presses's handling of an
extremely
> > powerful image. Rather than print a real-time image of the raid, many
(such
> > as exemplified on the cover of Time magazine) chose to run Greg Craig's
> > obviously staged rebuttal to that image.
> >
> > At the very least, they could have run side-by-sides but instead have
> > decided to -- once again -- hang with the administration.
>
> According to many of the reports I've seen, that's exactly what was done.
At
> the very least, it's what the Chicago Tribune did.
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5