Trump condemns Time cover, calling it the ‘Worst of All Time’
President Donald Trump vented on Truth Social about Time magazine’s cover for its 10 November issue, which praised his role in brokering a Gaza ceasefire. He labeled the image as the “Worst of All Time,” arguing the photograph was unflattering and manipulated to minimize his physique while exaggerating a crown-like halo effect from the backlit shot.
Time’s profile piece accompanies a cover image shot at the White House, with the sun directly behind Trump’s head. The effect, critics say, created a halo that made portions of his hair seem to vanish, an aesthetic choice Trump characterized as intentionally damaging. The magazine’s feature, meanwhile, lauds his involvement in mediating the ceasefire, presenting a nuanced look at an event with global implications.
The photo and its reception
The photo—taken by Graeme Sloane for Bloomberg on 5 October—was captured from a low angle, a technique often used to imbue subjects with power and authority. Trump argued that the angle, combined with backlighting, produced a compromised image that doesn’t reflect the man or the story accurately. In a social media post, he urged readers to question the editors’ judgment and questioned why such a photo was chosen.
The public reaction to the image has not been uniform. Some observers argued that the shot was editorially intentional, designed to cast Trump in a contemplative and almost heroic light, while others retained sympathy for the former president, noting his long ambition to grace Time’s cover.
Editorial perspectives on the cover
Media professionals weighed in on what the photo communicates beyond the headline. Carly Earl, Guardian Australia’s picture editor, suggested that the image conveys a sense of grandeur by presenting Trump looking upward, which can imply authority and contemplation. She described the halo-like overexposure around Trump’s hair as a byproduct of the lighting, not a deliberate attempt to mislead. Her assessment emphasizes how editorial choices pair with the accompanying story to shape public perception.
On the political front, a surprising voice joined the discussion from Russia: Maria Zakharova, director of information for the Russian foreign ministry, criticized Time’s decision, calling the image self-incriminating for the publication and pointing to contrasting pictures of President Joe Biden used elsewhere. Her commentary underscored how media imagery can become a talking point across international lines.
Editorial intent vs. public legsibility
Time’s editors are often scrutinized for balancing portraiture with reportage, especially when featuring high-profile figures in stories about diplomacy and conflict. In this instance, the combination of a laudatory Gaza ceasefire narrative and a striking, arguably theatrical portrait has sparked debate about how media should visually frame a president during a moment of relative global attention.
For Trump, the incident is another chapter in a long-running campaign to influence media representation. He has repeatedly sought Time’s cover in the past, including a period in which the magazine reportedly asked him to remove mocked-up covers from display at his properties. The latest controversy, however, centers not on the prose but on the image itself—and what it signals to readers about power and persona.
What this means for readers and the broader media landscape
The episode illustrates the enduring tug-of-war between editorial design and political messaging. Images, sometimes more than words, shape public memory of pivotal moments in diplomacy and governance. As debates about the ethics of photo selection continue, readers are reminded to consider both the story and the visual frame when consuming high-profile political journalism.
Ultimately, Time’s cover and the ensuing backlash spotlight the uneasy relationship between image, interpretation, and influence in modern news culture—where a single photograph can become the focal point of a larger discussion about power, propaganda, and perception.
