Agence France-Presse (AFP), a prominent international news agency, recently found itself at the centre of controversy after it deleted a photograph featuring Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, alongside her son and a turkey. The image was taken during a Thanksgiving event last November, but was removed from circulation following reports that it was deemed “unflattering” by White House staff.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/karoline-leavitt-1-033126-96a38ff71bad4cf5a1159dfbdc938b98.jpg)
In a statement provided to PEOPLE, Grégoire Lemarchand, a spokesperson for AFP, clarified that the decision to withdraw the photo was not influenced by any external pressures or official requests from the White House. He explained that the removal stemmed from editorial concerns regarding the quality of the image. Lemarchand noted that AFP had already released a number of superior images from the same event, suggesting that the angle of Leavitt and the turkey, known as Waddle, did not meet the agency’s standards.
Although the White House did not comment directly on the agency’s statement, there have been indications that President Donald Trump and other senior officials have expressed dissatisfaction with certain images in the past. Notably, this incident follows a broader trend of tension between the Trump administration and various media outlets, particularly those considered critical or unfriendly.
The photograph, captured by AFP photographer Andrew Caballero-Reynolds, had briefly made its way into circulation via Getty Images and was reportedly used by at least one Swiss publication prior to its deletion. News of the photo’s removal first came to light through reports by Status’ Oliver Darcy, raising questions about the agency’s editorial independence in the face of political sensitivities.
In discussing the circumstances surrounding the photo’s deletion, Lemarchand explained the rapid pace at which images are processed during high-volume events, such as White House press briefings. With a significant influx of images generated in real-time by photographers, editors often must make swift judgments about which images to publish. According to AFP, while they were aware of White House staff’s feelings regarding the photo, they maintained that no formal request to remove it had been made.
As of now, AFP continues to offer a plethora of images from White House events to various media outlets through their partnership with Getty Images. Many images from Leavitt’s recent press briefing are available on the Getty site, reflecting the ongoing volume of coverage available to journalists.
The atmosphere surrounding press relations within the Trump administration has been described as confrontational, particularly regarding coverage perceived as less favourable by administration officials. Leavitt herself recently expressed frustration with specific media organisations, criticising them for a lack of coverage on a tragic event involving an immigrant accused of murdering an 18-year-old student in Chicago.
Furthermore, tensions in the realm of press freedoms are evident beyond the White House. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has been embroiled in a legal dispute aimed at restricting access for certain news organisations within the Pentagon, raising alarms about media freedom in sensitive environments. This includes incidents where journalists from outlets like the Associated Press and Reuters were reportedly barred from photographing briefings regarding military actions.
President Trump has also previously vocalised his discontent over unflattering representations in media. In October, he expressed outrage over a cover photo used by Time magazine, labelling it “the Worst of All Time” and critiquing the image for misrepresenting him. Such moments highlight the unique pressures and grievances officials navigate in relation to state media portrayals.
As the complexities between the press and political figures continue to unfold, instances like the deletion of Leavitt’s photograph underscore ongoing debates about media integrity, editorial autonomy, and the delicate balance between political optics and journalistic standards. The incident serves as a reminder of the intricacies involved in maintaining independent press coverage in an increasingly charged political landscape.