The AP seemingly catches Sarah Palin being overly concerned with appearances when she is supposed to be worried about cholera victims:
In case you can’t read the caption, it says: “Dieu Nalio Chery / AP Photo. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, center, has her hair done during a visit to a cholera treatment center set up by the NGO Samaritan’s Purse in Cabaret, Haiti, Saturday Dec. 11, 2010. Palin arrived Saturday in Haiti as part of a brief humanitarian mission in an impoverished nation struggling to overcome post-election violence and a cholera epidemic. At right, Palin’s husband, Todd Palin.”
And at left, the hairdresser.
The picture was designed to make liberals choleric, and it worked.
The Daily Mail’s story was titled Ready for her close-up… Sarah Palin lands in Haiti (well, she wants to look just right for those poor cholera-stricken residents).
But my favorite reaction is from the Huffington Post’s Michael Shaw, in a post titled Reading the Pictures: Palin Does Haiti Cholera: How’s My Hair? (and, Did AP Lend a Curl?). What is interesting is that Shaw sensed the media bias — but decided that it meant that the Palins had really behaved badly towards the media:
If I find the fantastically clever Sarah Palin to be one of the shallowest and blatantly self-serving politicians, err, political celebrities I’ve ever seen, it doesn’t stop me from taking pause upon seeing these AP shots from Franklin Graham’s cholera treatment center in Haiti.
Damn right it’s revolting seeing Sarah getting her hair made up like this field hospital is her movie set . . .
And then, the multiple shots of Sarah sanitizing and washing her hands suggests the former Gov is primarily concerned, above all humanitarian else, about catching something.
There are two questions I can’t quite answer, however. 1.) Compassion notwithstanding, could these exact same images have been created if it was Biden, Bill Clinton, Hillary or Nancy Pelosi moving around this camp with media in tow over the same afternoon? 2.) How much was it the Palin team’s behavior, attitude or reputation that so encouraged these AP photographers (one or both local?) along with AP photo editors to suddenly drop the typical, everyday play-along (since we all get the difference between this vs. this) and deliver these scathing photo op-defying pictures of “the Sarah show?”
You have to love the mind-bending pretzel logic. If the media was unfair to Sarah Palin, it must show that Sarah Palin was being a big huge jerk to the media.
Because, why else would the media be unfair to Sarah Palin??
Here’s the problem. The sleuths at Free Republic figured out, based on clothing, that the “hairdresser” was Sarah’s daughter Bristol (h/t Eric Blair):
There she is, second from the right. That’s right: Bristol Palin was the hairdresser, simply fixing an out of place strand of hair on her mom’s head.
Which, of course, the photographer would have known. But deliberately chose not to reveal.
What media bias?