Is This the World’s Highest-Grossing Photograph?

[r.e.]

Careful readers will note that the NYT headline ends with a question mark. It is not making a definitive statement. The headline, like many headlines, is just a tease and doesn't mean anything at all.

I gather that you haven't read the article. You're wrong about the purpose of the headline, and you have no idea what the author has to say about the question in the headline, which he discusses in some detail.

So far, the NY Times has published 400 comments on this article from people who have read it. Some of the comments also make interesting reading.

[r.e.]

“It must be the highest-grossing photograph of all time.” Oh yeah, that's real definitive. I call BS.

Now you don't even have the headline right: "Is This the World’s Highest-Grossing Photograph?"

You know, you'd save yourself further embarrassment if you just read the article instead of continuing to make erroneous assertions about something you haven't even read.

You're also missing the point. It's an interesting article about the history, including economic, of a surprisingly successful photograph. It is not a news piece on the 2024 election or an academic paper on artificial intelligence. Judging from NY Times reader comments, the photograph elicits a lot of reactions, from memories of 1960s New York, to a civilised debate among readers about this 1960 photograph in relation to feminism, to discussion about the art market and the unusual way that this photograph has been marketed.

No need for hightened blood pressure.

[notorius]

I can see where Physical graffiti album cover author(Peter Corriston) took inspiration from.

[h2oman]

Fun photo - great story!