Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which photographer or news agency first published the image of Donald Trump asleep and when (date/year)?
Executive summary
The available analyses do not identify a single, undisputed first publisher of an image showing Donald Trump asleep; multiple separate images and videos from different events have been published by different outlets at different times, and the summaries cite competing attributions including AFP/Getty, AP and individual photographers, as well as late‑2025 and earlier instances (2017 and September 2025). No analysis in the dataset conclusively traces one definitive “first publication” because the items referenced appear to be different photographs or videos from distinct events, and the metadata or publication timestamps needed to establish primacy are not provided in the supplied analyses [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Competing attributions — multiple newsrooms claim similar images, creating confusion
The analyses show different organizations and photographers associated with images of Trump appearing to sleep: one analysis cites a Getty/AFP photo credited to Andrew Caballero‑Reynolds referenced in the context of a White House conference [1], while another names AP photographer Evan Vucci in coverage of an event dated November 6, 2025 [2]. A separate note points to a social outlet, Tyla, publishing a photo at the US Open on September 8, 2025 [3]. Meanwhile, a much earlier image from May 2017 photographed by Robert Ghement at NATO is cited in a different analysis as being mischaracterized as sleeping [4]. These overlapping attributions indicate the analyses are discussing multiple visual incidents rather than a single image with a clear provenance, which explains why no single “first publisher” is identified in the material provided.
2. Dates and events diverge — different incidents, different timelines
The dataset references at least three distinct timeframes and events that have produced images or videos described as Trump asleep: September 8, 2025 at the US Open [3], November 6–7, 2025 coverage of a White House appearance or press conference [2] [1], and an unrelated May 2017 NATO moment that was later debated [4]. The analyses repeatedly note absence of a single publication date tying all mentions to one origin; for instance, one entry states AFP/Getty’s Andrew Caballero‑Reynolds provided a photo in coverage but does not specify the original publication date [1], while AP/Evan Vucci is linked to coverage of November 6, 2025 without confirming whether that was the first run of the image [2]. This spread of dates demonstrates that the term “the image” likely conflates separate visual items across years and contexts.
3. Social posts and pundits amplify images but don’t prove first publication
Several analyses mention social media reposts and political commentary amplifying images — such as a gubernatorial post labeling Trump “Dozy Don” and sharing a screenshot [5] — but social shares do not equal first publication. The Tyla piece cited claims to have published a US Open photo September 8, 2025 [3], and state actors or politicians reposting images on X or other platforms often create the impression of newness even when the underlying image may have earlier provenance. Because the supplied materials lack direct metadata, original timestamps or wire service claims of exclusivity, social circulation cannot be used as definitive evidence of which newsroom or photographer originally published any given image.
4. Earlier images have been misrepresented — context matters
The 2017 NATO photograph by Robert Ghement illustrates how older photos are sometimes misframed as evidence of sleep; analyses note that footage and official captions from that event do not substantiate a claim that Trump was asleep [4]. This case underscores the importance of differentiating photographic context and event-specific metadata when tracing a first publication: an image from 2017 circulated later in a different narrative does not constitute a new “first” but can cause confusion. The assembled analyses show a pattern where images from distinct events are conflated, which weakens any claim that a single outlet first published “the image” without precise identification of which image is meant.
5. Bottom line and verification steps — how to establish first publication from here
Given the contradictions and multiple candidate sources in the dataset — Andrew Caballero‑Reynolds/AFP via Getty, Evan Vucci/AP, Tyla and Robert Ghement for an earlier unrelated photo — the most accurate conclusion is that the provided analyses do not establish a single first publisher or exact first publication date [1] [2] [3] [4]. To resolve this definitively, reviewers should obtain the original image file metadata and wire service captions, check timestamps on the wire posts from Getty/AFP and AP, and compare the event context (US Open, White House press conference, Oval Office, NATO 2017). Without that primary metadata, any claim about “first published by X on Y date” cannot be supported from the supplied analyses alone.