Let's have a look at kind of "questions" O'Brien is getting asked:
-Some people say that it doesn’t look fake enough, but I think it’s obvious.
-Isn’t it an accepted fact that photo-illustrations are a normal part of the language of magazine covers these days?
They couldn't ask the guy any questions that were easier or more leading than this. Except maybe "So, as everyone who's not an idiot surely knows, this happens all the time, doesn't it?"
Seriously though, I'm glad that Time is running this interview. I think that this signals to the readers what's going on and let's them know what to look for in the future.
On another note, O'Brien says, "I’ve been reading the media blogs all day and it’s funny that people think it’s [the cover’s] pulling the wool over people’s eyes. I think it has more to do with people being afraid of seeing a man cry."
And I think it has absolutely nothing to do with that. (Though that may be the case for Reagan's son [he said that his dad would never cry]) It has to do with people possibly thinking that this moment happened as pictured on Time's cover. I guess it's just the photojournalist in me.
Again, I'm glad Time's running the interview to set the tone for this and future issues.
Also, nice cover Tim.