Ballmer in the NY Times

Posted:
in AppleOutsider edited January 2014
NY Times article (The Times online is mostly free with registration. Use bugmenot.com if you desperately don't want to register.)



That AP picture of Ballmer that they use for the article is too funny! Can this guy project anything resembling dignity? Until now, I've avoided the "pick on Steve Ballmer" bandwagon, but DANCE, MONKEY BOY, DANCE!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member




    Still, to be fair, it you take enough pictures you can catch anybody looking any way you want (sleepy, stupid, crazed, etc.).



    I think Ballmer's problem is that his public persona actually is "monkey boy", so the editors play to that, consciously or no.
  • Reply 2 of 4
    k squaredk squared Posts: 608member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by addabox

    Still, to be fair, it you take enough pictures you can catch anybody looking any way you want (sleepy, stupid, crazed, etc.).



    And editors select those pictures to specifically embarrass people: just look at the pictures of Bush which are published.
  • Reply 3 of 4
    kolchakkolchak Posts: 1,398member
    Unflattering pictures of Bush are the last things he has to worry about. He'll be lucky if he doesn't go down in history as the worst president of the 20th and 21st centuries. Yes, I know the new millennium is still young, but he's doing everything he can to cement his candidacy.
  • Reply 4 of 4
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by k squared

    And editors select those pictures to specifically embarrass people: just look at the pictures of Bush which are published.



    Well, I don't think the overriding impulse is to "embarrass people", I think photos tend to get edited to conform to some larger notion of who you're dealing with (as in Ballmer's case).



    For instance, if the public persona of a person in the news is of a long winded martinet, you'll often see pictures of that person with their mouth open or their fist clenched in some kind of righteous tirade mode.



    Early pictures of Bush showed him as being resolute, or relaxed and friendly, because that was the "story".



    As his administration has worn on, he is increasingly depicted as pissy and irritable (aka "beleaguered'), because that is the "story", now.



    Keying photos to some unspoken master narrative certainly isn't fair but it is what happens.
Sign In or Register to comment.