Also, what is of serious concern is your failure to understand my drawing on the Charles Manson example:  I DID NOT utilize it as an example to convey the worthiness of the content you seek to remove, but, instead, I utilized it to highlight the illogical reasoning of your colleague's intention to remove the subject content (i.e., the middle-finger scandal) merely because your colleague has concerns it can have the effect of impugning one's character.  That is so erroneous.  The subject of the article did the act in a public place, so he should expect to have it publicly documented. He's a public figure in that respect, just as well.  If Manson did the criminal acts, it will be documented irrespective of how bad it impugns him, and so it follows if the subject of the article extended his middle finger, as photographed by an AP photographer, it will be documented as part of that scandalous conduct irrespective of whether the action of the subject causes a self-inflicted impugning of his character in the process.