June 11, 2011Dear Sir,I don't know if you'll publish this, but I'm not some old fogey, I'm a reasonably youthful, liberal-minded, and well-educated person. That photo of David Cox giving a double-“finger” to the camera did this enhance the story in a way that the writers couldn't? Was it a “need to know” photo, for the good of the public? I'm just curious as to why that particular photo had to be used in its unadulterated form. You could have blurred the “fingers” if you wanted to illustrate the defiance of the convicted. You could have selected a different photo. I'm very sad that your publication simply goes along with the current tide of holding nothing sacred. It might interest you to know that I saw a couple of kids doing this very same thing in imitation while having their photo taken today. Oh and by the way, they weren't more than about six or seven- saying “but I saw it in the paper, it's not that bad, everyone's doing it.” Parents were unimpressed. Nice work, RG.Someone had better have the good sense to be ashamed of themselves over there. I would have thought that a publication such as yours would have some sense of decorum, or of propriety, given its history and how it theoretically has served the public for all the years that it has. So share with the public why it was so critical for us that that photo had to be shown. Did it make me dislike this criminal more? Nope. Did it illustrate why this man had to be put away? Nope. Did it enhance the story in any way? Nope. I think the RG should be fined. If it's an “obscene gesture” as the story notes, why does something obscene appear in our daily paper?I don't know if anyone else cares, but I do. Please don't use my name because frankly I am afraid of being targeted by animals like this one. But be aware that this particular photo helped fray some more of Bermuda's social fabric, I saw it today, and you owe anyone whose eyes were unlucky enough to see this photo an apology. A loud, sincere, repeated one, not something tucked away on Page 30. Despicable and there's no excuse.DISGUSTEDCity of HamiltonEditor's Note: As already noted in Monday's editorial, the photo was published to show the lack of remorse David Cox had after being convicted of murder. However, almost all of the reaction to use of the photo has been negative, and we will take these strongly expressed feelings into consideration in future.