Why is This Not a Story About Art?
Leibovitz is a terrific photographer. No doubt about that. I even am willing to say that much of her work, although often done for commercial clients and contributing to the cult of celebrity that plagues us, is art. (But aren't such judgments political?) The thing to notice about the current episode is that the editors at The Times did not place a single one of these stories in the Arts section of the paper. That would require them, and us, to acknowledge in some explicit way that works of art - Leibovitz's portraits and the rights to them - are commodities and that, as such, they get entangled in all sorts of sordid legal and financial goings on.* You can't have that!
* This is not the first time I have noted indecorous topics in relation to Leibovitz and her work. In fact, I've commented here numerous times.