Bull(shit) controversy
I feel bad for Rothstein! He was only doing his job and got caught up in a widely known controversy. He saw an interesting opportunity and did what any normal person, including me, would have done. People like cow skulls for some reason. They are symbolic of the gritty west. When Locke said he couldn’t see how the photo could be fake simply due to the object in it being moved ten feet, I agreed.
The whole incident was blown out of proportion. I like Roy Stryker urging Rothstein to “hide the goddam skull” since it has caused so much controversy and trouble. What is interesting is that by todays standard, this would not be considered controversial at all (at least from the number of pictures I’ve seen that misrepresent the content of the article it is a part of.) If it’s anyone’s fault, it’s the editors who chose to use the photo to depict the drought, although I would have done the same thing. I would not have taken a dull picture of this county’s literal water supply. It is like clickbait from the 30’s. Just like YouTube videos, this newspaper was publishing something eye-catching to capture the severity of draught. Some people may be able to call that manipulation. I call it marketing. Some people, such as the residents of specified county, might have disagreed with the methodology claiming it was too severe a depiction (one of death).