The crying Honduran girl on the cover of Time was not separated from her mother, father says

The original was a stunning image, which has been used to criticize ICE’s policy of separating children from parents attempting to immigrate at the border — a policy which Trump says he dislikes. The animated version of the Time cover makes it clear that this is a composite picture, though of course the emotional power of the juxtaposition is exactly what the cover is shooting for.

Journalists love reporting when their competition gets in trouble, so if Time’s coverage included any claims about the girl’s fate that turn out to be inaccurate, we’ll hear about it. As is often the case, it’s not journalists spreading the idea that this girl was separated from her parents, it’s people who have an emotional reaction to the photo and share it with an inaccurate caption.  And journalists are now reporting the latest from the father of the little girl, who learned “this week” that the girl and her mother are together.

A tiny crying toddler and Donald J. Trump share the cover of the July 2 Time Magazine.…Thursday, hours before the little girl’s father spoke out, Time magazine released its July 2 cover using the child’s image, without the mother, in a photo illustration that shows her looking up at President Trump, who is seen towering above her.

“Welcome to America,” the cover reads.

At first, not much was known about the mother and daughter or what happened to them.

Many — including the journalist who took the photo — speculated that the girl might ultimately have been separated from her mother, like the more than 2,300 migrant children split from their parents since May 5.

In Honduras, Denis Javier Varela Hernandez recognized his daughter in the photo and also feared that she was separated from her mother, he told The Post.

But he learned this week that his wife and daughter were not, in fact, separated. —Washington Post

3 thoughts on “The crying Honduran girl on the cover of Time was not separated from her mother, father says

  1. Vox offers a good overview of this controversy. “The story gets more complicated now that we know the image we believed to be portraying a family separation, was nothing of the sort. Moore’s caption wasn’t inaccurate, but in the midst of a national uproar over the White House’s policy of family separation, we imposed an inaccurate narrative on the photograph.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *