I see no problem with thi picture. Seems like teh photogropher was working with limited space for the cover shoot and since Bridget (McCain’s adopted daughter) is short, she was placed in a spot where she would not be hidden.

Look, I am no fan of John McCain, but give the McCains for doing something good…giving this girl a life that she would never have had in teh orphanage in Bangladesh.

During the debates where was Barack seated?

In my eyes, this is more than just a coincidence.

Maybe, just maybe, the way this photo is arrange has f**k all to do with race. The guys are clearly taller and therefore putting them in front would obscure the rest of the family. It may be nothing to do with subserviance, merely fitting everyone on the damn photo considering the available dimensions and orientation of the magazine cover.

The black lady is front left and apparently at the feet of the rest of the family. Does this imply an archaic image of slavery? Without knowing the details of that shoot it would be all guess work to figure out how how this composition came about. Perhaps she offered to sit, perhaps she arrived late and the shot was rushed. Or perhaps it was on purpose that she appears below the rest of the family.

All I know is the McCain strategists, editors and all hundreds of well qualified, highly paid people must have studies this picture, as they do every word of his speeches before they’re planned and approved, and saw nothing but an innocent family picture.

Didn’t Sigmund Freud say sometimes a cigar is just a cigar?

If they wanted to make her look as though she was really part of the family, they would have put her head closer to the rest of the McCains.

I see one person placed bottom-left all by herself, a perfectly good empty space center-right that in comparison with the rest of the photo is very vacant; and I wonder why she wasn’t placed center-right instead.

I think the misplacement was either an accident, or intentionally done by the photographer to make the McCains look bad and to stir up controversies such as in this blog post. Was this photo taken by the same photographer who took photos of McCain with a floodlight at his feet and photoshopped blood on his face? If so, then the reason for the misplacement is obvious.

It’s too bad the photo was so poorly done and that it (apparently) stirred up gossipy discusssions like the ones here on MeyerWeb.

I would be interested in other McCain family photos and how the adopted child is positioned. Perhaps then a more objective conclusion would be possible.

Proves the point though, that you cannot chose your family…;-)

The first time I looked at the picture I completely missed the black woman on the left floor. She kinda falls away in the background of the dark clothes everyone else wears. She’s also dissonant in the style of her clothes. On the second look I thought: How nice, the au pair gets to be in the picture too. Since she’s obviously a servant, indicated by the position in the picture. If she is the adopted daughter, her position in the picture would indicate her first name is ‘Cinderella’ :)

In an election year, this is not a neutral picture. However much what we read in it springs from ourselves, this picture did not do neutral placement of the persons involved.

Disclaimer: I’m Dutch, to me both candidates are quite far removed from my daily life though I sympathize with Obama since he strikes me as a pretty nice and thoughful person.