The answer appears to be "Yes," and it is just one small example of how the media works in large ways and small to manipulate its viewers to shape how they think about issues.
When I first saw the accusation, I had to admit I was a bit skeptical. Not so much because I thought they wouldn't do that sort of thing—they are Pravda, after all—but because I thought Pretti was decent-looking enough that he didn't need to be cleaned up.
They had a photo of him in his scrubs; he looked friendly enough, and they were constantly repeating that he was an ICU nurse, which should easily make him sympathetic enough. Why Photoshop or generate an AI version of him?
Well, apparently, they didn't think Pretti was pretty enough, so they prettified him.
Yes, it’s realhttps://t.co/Wgq9aujwLr
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 27, 2026
There is a weird kind of sickness in believing that your martyr—and that is how the left genuinely sees Pretti—isn't up to your standards of good looks, so you must prettify him. But this is a standard tactic. When you want to turn somebody into a sympathetic victim, you pick a photo. We see this all the time with "victims" of police "brutality" the media always chooses a picture of them when they were young, preferably before puberty, or of them in their high school graduation shot, rather than a mug shot if they have one.
Nicolle Wallace while showing AI-enhanced Pretti photo:
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) January 27, 2026
"Donald Trump and his administration are demanding once again that you do not believe your eyes and ears."
Amazing. pic.twitter.com/dPojKj6QDw
Conversely, when they are doing a hit piece on conservatives, they choose the worst possible photo of them, or even manipulate photos to make them look bad or evil. They adjust the color temperature to make them look slightly greenish, or do the sinister black and white dark shot.
See what the Media does?
— C3 (@C_3C_3) January 27, 2026
Everything they do is to manipulate.
To propagandize.
They truly are the enemy of the people. pic.twitter.com/uOMKm4tkqu
One of the weirdest examples I noticed a couple of months back was the New York Times' profile of Jillian Michaels, who happens to be a really beautiful woman.
They did everything they could to make her look bad because she is a traitor to their cause, and worst of all, a fan of RFK, Jr. So they use one of the most powerful tools you can to shape opinion: visual cues.
Vanity Fair did the same thing, only worse, with their White House photoshoot. They managed to make every single official they photographed look awful or even scary.
Unbelievable what vanity fair let Christopher Anderson do at the White House - really feels like he’s making fun of them, obviously the close up’s are incredible but placing them up against walls this like is wild - have to wonder what the white house thought they were portraying pic.twitter.com/6KuhpZWGmx
— Edward Row 𓃡 (@edwardrow) December 16, 2025
They violated every rule in the book for a photographer. The photos belittled them, made them look especially bad, and created a sense of menace.
I REALLY like this picture of you, Sec. Rubio. It carries tremendous gravitas and conveys the enormous burden of your position.
— BLACK DUMPLING™ (@BlackDumpling) December 18, 2025
No, it isn't a pretty picture. It's a hard picture. Hard as hell. pic.twitter.com/gMrS2QmH4z
It was a huge mistake for the White House to agree to talk to Vanity Fair, of course, but that is because Vanity Fair, along with almost every other media outlet, is Pravda.
Vanity Fair’s “eye of the hurricane” profile on Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and this Cabinet isn’t journalism— least of all photojournalism. It’s sabotage.
— The Conservateur (@ConservateurMag) December 16, 2025
Despite a decade of abysmal mistreatment of President Trump and his family, they were given a rare opportunity and access to… pic.twitter.com/ivPdcRz9qB
Liberals loved it, of course, which was the point. Or one of them. Shaping The Narrative™ is the ultimate one, of course.
The Vanity Fair White House pictures really hit different in print. That is diabolical lmao pic.twitter.com/ZYbWVq25gP
— (⺣ ◡ ⺣)♡ (@strwbabyshrtcke) January 21, 2026
They say a "picture is worth a thousand words," but that underestimates their impact, especially today when nobody reads past the first 100. That's why we get so much propaganda on TikTok and Instagram; it's where you can build an image that is far more powerful than facts.
Obviously, MSNOW knows this.
I experienced this myself back when I was doing a lot of media. I am not a good-looking guy by any means, but a photographer once caught me looking particularly awful.
This was the photo attached to the story.
Flattering, isn't it?
It's weird that MSNOW wanted to pretty up Pretti, but it is, after all, very on-brand.
Editor's note: If we thought our job in pushing back against the Academia/media/Democrat censorship complex was over with the election, think again. This is going to be a long fight. If you want to join the conversation in the comments -- and support independent platforms -- why not join our VIP Membership program? Choose VIP to support Hot Air and access our premium content, VIP Gold to extend your access to all Townhall Media platforms and participate in this show, or VIP Platinum to get access to even more content and discounts on merchandise. Use the promo code FIGHT to join or to upgrade your existing membership level today, and get 60% off!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member