That is a pretty big difference. (Click on the image to make it bigger)
This got me to thinking. How often does the media decide to go with a bad picture when a pretty one is available or when do they pick a pretty one when they could have one that is a bit more realistic?
You can often tell a writer's political leanings just by the pictures that go with it. Is the president looking presidential or sweating? Poor Marko Rubio didn't even get a shot in focus when the author disagreed with him, but in a more favorable article he looks in charge. The message here seems to be that if the writer likes the person then the picture is pretty. If they want to sway you against someone they will go to extreme lengths to find an unflattering shot.
Just this past week Alec Baldwin got wrinkly bags under his eyes and thinning hair. Who'd have thought that the simple act of insulting a journalist on twitter could age someone so quickly.