To me it seems it is meant to depict a historical event as it occurred and as further described in the accompanying article.
Of course it isn’t. We’re dealing with a publication which, to the knowledge of its readership, does not print pictures of women, so the absence of women is meaningless in telling the story. Had a world leader been obscured by another, or by a lamppost, would you say it’s a falsehood to print the picture? Of course not, it’s not supposed to be a comprehensive list of attendees. The picture is there for illustrative purpose, and to dress up the article. The only difference would be intention, and since the intention of the editing was not to create a false impression, but for policy/shmiras einayim/tznius purposes, that argument falls apart.