The Washington Post faced a reader revolt this week after printing a front page photo of two men kissing. The picture was taken in Washington, D.C., on the day the district started accepting applications for same-sex marriages. Some readers thought the Post was wrong to put such a frank picture on its front page, and about two dozen people canceled their subscriptions. Was this a lot of fuss over nothing, or did the angry readers have a point? (Watch D.C.'s first gay marriage ceremonies)

The photo belonged on the front page: Did we go too far, asks Andy Alexander, the Washington Post's ombudsman? "Of course not." Our job as a journal of record is to "capture reality," and the approval of same-sex marriages has "historic significance" in Washington, D.C. The photo "warranted front-page display" and we're glad we printed it.
"Readers react to photo of two men kissing"

The Post was pushing the liberal, gay agenda: Readers are not offended by "homosexuality per se," says Donald Douglas at American Power, but by "the Left's program of radical social engineering." To quote a reader of this blog, most Americans are "totally disinterested" in homosexuality. The Post may think it is "supporting a good cause," but it "just does not reflect America, as a whole."
"WaPo's 'Two Men Kissing'"
If reality offends you, don't read newspapers: The Washington Post should be applauded for its "classy" response to this, said Drew Grant at Mediaite. Perhaps they're better off without these affronted subscribers. People who want to live in an "alternate reality" should go to "where the news reflects only what [they] want to hear." Luckily, that place exists. "It's called cable."
"Washington Post defends pic of men kissing"


Prop 8's gay judge
Gay marriage trial: No YouTube?
Gay marriage's big defeat
Why Maine rejected gay marriage