Like other newspapers, The Times illustrated its main story Wednesday on Hillary Clinton’s historic nomination for president with a photo — of her husband.
Of course, Bill Clinton is no ordinary spouse of a candidate (and neither was Hillary Clinton when her husband was president). Still, many readers detected a whiff of sexism in The Times’ decision to feature a large photo of the former president basking the adulation of the Democratic National Convention crowd when it was the former secretary of State who received her party’s nomination for president.
Here are some of their letters.
Manhattan Beach resident Kelly Ritter says running a photo of Bill Clinton sends the wrong message to young women:
I went to the store on Wednesday to buy multiple copies of that day’s Los Angeles Times. I especially wanted one copy as a keepsake for my 16-year-old daughter.
I cannot imagine The Times publishing a photo of Michelle Obama on the night President Obama was nominated, even if she had spoken as brilliantly then as she did this year about the meaning of this nomination for women and girls. The Times’ editors apparently have not been listening.
Judith Martin-Straw of Culver City noticed photos of everyone but Hillary Clinton:
I can just barely describe how appalled I was on the morning after Hillary Clinton’s historic nomination by the Democratic Party to see a picture of her husband on the front of the paper.
I did watch Bill’s speech, and he did a fine job of presenting Hillary’s history as an activist and a politician. But it’s not about Bill. In fact, nowhere in the whole section on the convention was there a current picture of Hillary. There was a big photo of Sen. Bernie Sanders and a shot of former Secretary of State Madeline Albright leaving the stage under a projected picture of Albright and Clinton that looked to be from the 1990s.
Janet Kinosian of Santa Ana accuses The Times of sexism:
The Times has insulted women and shown the still-sexist bent of the media in 2016 by refusing to put a photo of Hillary Clinton on the front page, where she obviously belonged.
I’m sure the Suffragettes would not have been surprised, though I am.