Not AWOL

St. Petersburg Times reported Marine recruits so new that their hair hasn't been cut don't sound like the best models for a story about soldiers going AWOL - particularly since none in the group is a deserter.

But there they are, pictured on the March cover of Harper's magazine along with a headline that reads, "AWOL in America: When Desertion Is the Only Option."



Lance Cpl. Kyle Bridge of St. Petersburg is one of them. When the 19-year-old Marine reservist first heard he was on the cover of a national magazine, he thought it sounded cool. A friend teased him about being famous. Then he realized the story was about soldiers who desert from the U.S. Army. "It's kind of frustrating," Bridge said. "Most people that see me, if they know me, they know I wouldn't go AWOL."

The cover photo, taken at Parris Island, S.C., shows seven Marines lined up in their T-shirts, shorts and socks. They are not identified in photo credits or in the article. In fact, Harper's says the Marines are not meant to depict people in the article.

"We are decorating pages," said Giulia Melucci, the magazine's vice president for public relations. "We are not saying the soldiers are AWOL. Our covers are not necessarily representative." A media observer said using real people as "decorations" for a story about deserters might go too far.... Another issue is that the photograph was altered. One recruit's image appears lighter than the others, as if he were disappearing. Getty Images, the agency that sold the photograph to Harper's, did not know it would be manipulated. The agency prohibits tampering with an image.

Hat Tip to Michelle Malkin

Betsy Newmark bloged What is it with these magazines who purport to report on serious subjects but have few qualms about manipulating the cover art.... But, I'm just simplistic and don't understand the sophisticated concept of "decorating pages" with nonrepresentative pictures for a cover story.

SayAnythingBlog blogged "Our covers are not necessarily representative.” That’s certainly not the impression people are going to get when they read the magazine. Of course, perhaps we should be surprised at this sort of ineptitude from Haper’s, a magazine which published a story from a journalist at an event which had not occurred yet (something the Associated Press was guilty of as well around the same time).

Florida Cracker blogged Giulia Melucci, vice-president for public relations for Harper's says the cover photo is merely decoration. There's no word on what her reaction would be if she were pictured on the cover of Time with a knife superimposed in her hand to illustrate a story on "Women Who Kill."

Or if the HQ of Harper's was pictured on the cover of Newsweek to illustrate a story "Does Media Profit From Child Porn?" Or "Magazines That Suck."

Can we trust any magazine's cover to tell the truth?