A Scandal Involving a Democrat Like Obama? Use a Title with Entirely Laconic Words

Can anyone imagine how a Bush (a Republican) choice for his cabinet had been reported in the MSM had he or she been involved in a scandal — as in blazing headlines on top of the first page?

But where Barack Obama (a Democrat) is concerned, all the mainstream media can do about the (non?)event, on the front page of the International Herald Tribune (the sister newspaper of the New York Times) of January 6, 2009, is put (towards the bottom of the page) a tiny paragraph linking to a story inside and entitled, laconically, President-elect loses choice for his cabinet.

There are so many double standards involved here, you don't know whether to laugh or to cry:

• A basic rule about titles that every journalist student knows is: use the shortest word possible (not "assassinate" but "kill", not "president" but "Bush"). Here, they don't use "Obama" (or even a relatively short word like "president" — true, it's too early), but — to defuse criticism of the One? — a word three times as long (President-elect), with 14 to 15 characters.
• The title totally ignores the charges against New Mexico's governor
  
• while the titles inside the paper make Bill Richardson's departure sound (besides being voluntary) like nothing but a regrettable and destructive event (hurt, loss, etc…)