Re "One picture, many views," Postscript, Sept. 15
Like many of your readers, I was sickened by your decision to put a photo of the mortally wounded Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens on the front page of Thursday's paper. Just because a camera can capture a moment of "truth" doesn't mean that all should see it.
Managing Editor Marc Duvoisin explained the decision-making process of your editorial staff, noting that the published image was the "least grisly of the photos" — as though divulging that bit of information somehow justifies the inclusion of that photo as opposed to others that we might have seen. Please tell me, how did your readers benefit from seeing that photograph?
Stevens was born, raised and went to college in California. There's a good chance some of his family members and friends are among your readers.
I was one of those shocked by the publication of the photo of the mortally wounded Stevens just as I was shocked by the eerily similar photo of the mortally wounded Bobby Kennedy.
But more shocking than the photos was that both of these good men who worked so selflessly for the perfectibility of the human condition were felled by acts of mindless fanaticism.
Sam La Sala
Letters: Projecting American power
Letters: The roots of anti-U.S. unrest
Letters: A young victim of the drug war