The New York Times is not a paper I care to read, but it’s good to know what lefties are thinking, and I can’t escape that rag because my husband likes to do the crossword puzzles.
So I pick up the liberal lump of a paper and see a picture that seems unusually bad even for the Times. Of course, the story below the photo is bad enough, “Every Day I Struggle—Transgender Woman Tells Abuse in Men’s Prison.” Still, the picture wins the prize for being nothing short of abusive.
The picture is of a little boy, dressed in a suit and tie, crying his eyes out as he holds an empty Easter egg basket. Evidently, the Times thought it would be utterly hilarious to show a six-year-old in distress. And he’s not just mildly disappointed or a little upset. He’s clearly in a full blown wailing cry. If that’s not enough, the editors obviously think it’s important to print his full name as well. I won’t repeat their cruel cut here by providing it, but suffice it to say that his name is Judah.
So thanks to the New York Times, Judah not only gets to remember a really bad day, but now for the rest of his life, he possibly can be remembered as the egg crybaby not just by his friends but by every other person who Googles his name. That’s right. When Princeton or Yale is reviewing his college application and wants to do that final check to make sure he has the right stuff for the Ivy Leagues, among whatever else Judah chooses to put online himself, they’ll have his screaming photo to take a gander at. Not only that, but they surely will note that he couldn’t find an Easter egg. Colleges these days look for every possible shortcoming in an applicant. So how will they view this photo?
And what if he applies to West Point or Annapolis? Men don’t cry in public (until after they seek a sex change operation in prison evidently—see page one story), so will this public display of emotion cause problems in a military appointment? How about a Division 1 coach looking at him for a possible football or basketball scholarship? Cursing, screaming, sending out nasty tweets. Those aren’t deal killers. Crying on the cover of the New York Times? Hmm . . .
Now the Times attempts to cover itself by painting this as some kind of feel good photo story. Evidently, another child’s father gave him an egg. Big deal. So the kid gets to carry around a basket with an egg he didn’t find.
I’m not suggesting that we should all feel sorry for him because he didn’t find an Easter egg. We all win some and lose some, but at six-years-old, we certainly don’t need that lesson splashed on the front of the New York Times.
And that brings me to the biggest point here. So much for those compassionate liberals at the New York Times always pretending to save the world. Pictures speak louder than words, and this picture says it all.
I really hope Judah gets a cool commercial deal out of all of this. He’s cute so he’d look great in a Gap ad. Besides, Gap likes to feature heroes or people standing up against injustice in their advertisements so I think he qualifies. Or maybe Russell Stover can give him free Easter eggs and bunnies for life. He deserves it after he was used in a shameful attempt to sell a few newspapers.
Better yet, let’s start a GoFundMe campaign on his behalf as another victim of the media out looking for a story where there is none.
At the very least, I hope others are as outraged as I am and contact the Times to complain about their unfair exploitation of a clearly sweet kid who simply couldn’t find an Easter egg.
Unless the Times can prove there is really a story here (e.g., that the Easter eggs were supplied by Wall Street banks and were hidden in places only children of one percenters could find them), they should publicly apologize for their behavior. In the meantime, I will continue to get my news from the quite reliable Page Six and the Wall Street Journal.