Yesterday on the Huffington Post was a perfect illustration of the kind of blatant bias that pervades the HP's editorial decisions. We bring our attention to the World section, a Huffington Post hub for all of its world news. The Huffington Post covered a variety of topics yesterday about the various conflicts going on all over the world. Let's dissect each one's photo choice, shall we?
First, we have the news that a NATO airstrike in Afghanistan killed 10 civilians (and four "insurgents"). Here's the picture:
A picture of a destroyed structure. How impersonal. How cold.
Next, we have news of the chosen victims of the Huffington Post: the poor suffering Palestinians. Unfortunately, their suffering is being caused by Egypt this time, not Israel. Egypt is flooding the smuggling tunnels on the Egypt-Gaza border. So what's the picture choice?
Again, construction equipment and a wide angle shot. No faces seen, no emotions displayed.
Third, we've got the Huffington Post's ideal story. Human Rights Watch has accused Israel of "violating the laws of war" during Pillar of Autumn last November. What's the picture choice for this article?
Ah, there's the picture of crying women to accompany the article. Would anyone care to speculate as to why the other two articles didn't warrant a picture of crying women? After all, ten innocent people died in the first one, and Palestinians suffered in the second. But if Israel cannot be blamed, the HP sticks to less provocative pictures.
But least you think the Huffington Post is completely devoid of humanity, it also included a sympathetic picture for this article:
So hang in there, Afghans. Once 70,000 of you die, the Huffington Post will give you a sympathetic picture in its articles too.