I think the "serious answer" would be "you don't put a photo of yourself, or, in fact, anything related to yourself that could be misconstrued as egocentric or status-serving, in an article related to suicide; you just let it speak for itself." However, that sort of goes against the whole point of the site's format, which is, basically, to status-affiliate [through social learning] with people who have done things that have made them high-status in one way or another.

I think the "serious answer" to that would be "then they shouldn't have done the interview" (or "they should have made some special exception to their normal site formatting," which through interview prioritization basically amounts to the same thing) which has interesting implications for the ethics of free speech.