When selling a story, a novel, a film, shock value is a big deal. It can make or break a piece of entertainment. And I'm not above including shock in my writing. But I'm wondering: Is anybody worried about the poor kid on the cover of Time (May 2012) this month? The debates I've heard about this article seem to concern the breastfeeding debate in general, as well as what makes a good mom, what makes a bad one. For the record, I am a huge supporter of breastfeeding. Age three seems a bit old to me, but that's a personal choice, as is how to feed your child in the first place. I don't care where you do it, either. I don't care if you are discreet about it or not. However, putting this kid on the cover of Time in this manner-- and knowing it will be one of those memorable covers for years to come...I mean how did the parents/Editors see fit to do this? I'm not offended by the photo in the least--except for the fact that someone is going to wave it in that kid's face (literally or figuratively) come 1st grade. They couldn't sit him on her lap with his back to the camera?
Opinions on the wellbeing of the child in the photo? Is it inviting being picked on in the future? Maybe I'm making too big a deal of it?
