Political nuancing or editorial prerogative?

I saw this interesting forum letter and reply between Low Thia Kiang and ST editor on ST today. In low's letter, he mentioned about the biased reporting especially on how the ST front page showed a large photo of Sylvia and himself talking with grim faces, with the headline 'WP faces allegations of dishonesty'.

When I first saw the front page, my first impression was a deliberate media framing in process. ST editor claimed that they have picked the photo as it summed up dramatically the story of the day. my question is, is media overly sensationalizing the issue by showing the picture, which I believe is taken out of context. The picture showed them in discussion, but does it necessarily mean that they are discussing about the allegations? They could be discussing about the great turnout or the change in weather for that matter.

Communications experts will say that the right nuancing of words and pictures can frame and perpetuate beliefs and the notion of truth. Public opinion can be easily swayed by a deliberate media framing tactic to infer truth in their reporting. ST reporters take thousand and one pictures on a daily basis and I am cynical that that was the best picture to sum up dramatically the story of that day, as claimed by the editor. On the contrary I think the picture adds to the drama as the story unfolds.

ST editor said that it came as a surprise, that being professional journalists they do not see themselves as cheerleaders for any political party and they have done well and will continue to do so.

and with that statement 'I'm surprised' myself. What do you think?