I see both points of view

I am going to exercise the right not to pass judgment on the AP photograph. I know it may seem weak or spiritless to not take a stance either way, but how can any of us really decide one way or another on this subject?

How many of us can honestly say we have been put in the same position as this soldier and his family? It is true that the photo/interview package tells a greater story of the US military's loss of control in Afghanistan, but if it were my child I don't know if I want my son's violent death to tell it.

On the other hand, if I were put in that position, I may feel as though the use of my sons’ death in the story may give his passing greater meaning. The attention to the story memorializes him to a larger extent and it would give me solace to know he died for the greater good of the country.

Which begs the question what good does this story bring? It's not good enough to say it sells more papers or its compelling news that people want to read. The story needs to make people's emotions boil over. Readers should put down the paper and be angry or emotional enough to call their Congressman or Congresswoman and tell them to get their stuff together and give the troops what they need to crush the Taliban and for good. The package needs to tell a story that by making the right decisions, the war can end swiftly and without more unnecessary bloodshed of our young troops.