Even if they read the article, they could still take it the wrong way. I'm sure everyone's seen someone take a completely foreign message from things before. They could see him as vilified hero who was trying to fight for his people.
How and why will people, according to your prediction, reach that conclusion from just the picture and selective misinterpretation of the article? With no other influence or previous bias. Please do provide at least an example.
Did I claim "With no other influence or previous bias"? No. I understand, most won't be affected. However, the type of people who could actually see it that way are the ones who are likely to kill people.
It's a bad thing because it makes bad people look good. Our society has weird hang-ups with attractive = good, ugly = evil. It's a standard shorthand in our media, and by making the Bomber look pretty, you're making him look good.
I find it funny that you literally ripped a page out of Fox News’s handbook and provided justification for it without a hint of irony or self-awareness.
This standard you have set justifies bias in the media via image impression. Journalism is to overcome such hang-ups and report truthfully and informatively.
I didn't justify anything, I said that's what our society does. I have no idea how the hell that's supposed to justify bias in the media. I was saying "this is what is done". I never said "this is what should be done". I was simply saying that when you make someone look pretty, it makes people less likely to be negative towards them. For example, attractive women get lighter sentences than unattractive women, and overall, women get less death penalty sentences for the same crimes that men get them for.
Let's ignore the hundreds of examples of fiction using "attractive" as a shorthand for "good guy".
Quick ignore all the aversions listed on that page in addition to the playing with section because it does not fit your argument.
The fact is, historically, it has leaned more towards playing it straight, and still does. Those who play with it or advert it notice the common trend and purposely play with our expectations.
It's not like the fiction and artwork of a society say anything about how they view the world, after all.
[Citation needed] But let’s have some fun with this, FATAL. By the standard you set forth: FATAL being a work of fiction, containing artwork and being published in the United States must then represent how society within the United States views the world. Garb yourself a live one! Over generalization, how does it fucking work?
You're joking, right? I'm sorry, I was pretty sure this was common knowledge. I was pretty sure that every knew that we study the tales and art of periods of time and societies in order to gain a better insight to them. I was pretty sure we study the art and statues of the Greeks to see their obsession with perfection. I was pretty sure that we study the more realistic artwork of ancient Rome to see how they differed from the Greeks. I was pretty sure we studied the uniform style of the Egyptian artwork to gain a better insight into the ceremonial nature of it, as well as their culture and their creation myths. I was pretty sure that it's a general thing that the creations of a society reflect their culture. I was pretty sure that everyone learned that in high school, but I guess not.
It's Let's not get into the fact he already has thousands of mostly-female supporters. After all, there's no way that the fact that thousands of people already see him as a sympathetic figure due to his beauty that using a glam selfie would in any way promote this.
Lol good old Argumentum ad populum. How can X amount of people be wrong after all?
That's not even remotely what I'm saying. I'm not saying they're not wrong. In fact, I think they are wrong. I'm saying, if that many people already believe it, then why would you think more can't? It's like going "Well, all the religious people now believe their faiths, but I'm sure nobody would ever convert to them!"
It's amazing how all of your arguments are either flat out wrong,
ad hominem attacks, or should be something you learned back in high school.