The original article I saw was questioning the picture that was on the cover too. I see from the latest round of news that the ones on her site were the real problem, but yesterday’s first release of the story talked about how they had used a very unflattering picture of McCain.
Sorry if I wasn’t too clear. I’m getting old and my fingers don’t follow my brain in explaining things as well as they did at one time!
I don’t know how it works but I assume the photog takes the pics and then the publication does the airbrushing/enhancments if they desire.
I agree that the difference in the stark McCain cover and the airbrushed “superman” pose of Obamas indicates a lack of balance in their propaganda efforts. But I don’t think you can place the lack of airbrushing of McCains photo at the feet of the photog. That was an editorial decision.