You're a more data based person by personality (I'm guessing), so this may not be as relatable to you as it pertains to the average person (who has a pretty difficult time reading through a medical study or the proverbial wall of text). Attractive graphics, layout, and insertion of imagery helps them not get bored and turn the page (the average person doesn't necessarily read a magazine or paper from cover to cover, which is why it's important for articles and advertisements to be attention grabbing), and to retain the information consumed through memory hooks.
You know all this, though. You're likely significantly more educated than myself in most fields, this one included (this is all pretty basic for anyone in any sort of educational or informational capacity, particularly if catering to a clientele that needs things presented in a maximally palatable fashion).
Yes, we respond to faces, so they're a good way to grab attention. If I were designing a billboard on the side of the road where people usually don't look, I put a face there to grab their attention. But we're talking about a page of a newspaper that people have already decided to buy. You already have their attention.
Yes, we respond to emotion and facial expressions. But the newspaper photos I've seen aren't usually faces expressing some kind of emotion, they're just people giving a lecture or maybe smiling at the camera.
Yes, we remember better when we see something, so educators often include images for that reason. Is that what you think when you see the photo? "That was very useful, now I'll remember that ____ gave a speech last week"?
I'm not saying there should be pictures, but the pictures should add some meaning to the article, and there are a lot more interesting ways to do that rather than a headshot and/or speaker shot.
