CurlTalk

Obama and the New Yorker's satirical cover. Have you heard about this?

FreeCurlsFreeCurls Posts: 4,408Registered Users
this will be on the cover of the the July 21st issue of the New Yorker,
/home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.politico.com%2Fglobal%2Ftny%25207.21.jpg" class="Popup

It shows Michelle with an Afro and an AK 47 and Barack doing the fist bump with Barack in a turban


The magazine explains at the start of its news release previewing the issue: “On the cover of the July 21, 2008, issue of The New Yorker, in ‘The Politics of Fear,’ artist Barry Blitt satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign.”

Any thoughts on this? Some people won't get it, some will still it's a fine line.
[FONT=&quot]Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce & FreeCurls[/FONT]


«13

Comments

  • xcptnlxcptnl Posts: 15,678Registered Users
    I just saw this today on the morning news. The only thing I heard was that both Obama and McCain campaign spokesmen have denounced it.

    I have not read the article that goes with it so I am unsure as to how the picture relates to it.
    Central Massachusetts

    One good reason to only maintain a small circle of friends is that three out of four murders are committed by people who know the victim. ~George Carlin~

    In regards to Vagazzling: They just want to get into the goods without worrying about getting scratched up by fake crystals. ~spring1onu~
  • redcelticcurlsredcelticcurls Posts: 17,502Registered Users
    I'd have to read the artice to gauge it for myslef.

    But, I can see how those who already feel that way anyway (thoes types who go the Obama/Osama route or still think that Obama is a Muslim) would jump all over it.
    Kiva! Microfinance works.

    Med/Coarse, porous curly.
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users
    i like it very much but i wish it wasn't on the cover. there are many people who won't read the article or understand it as satire as they're walking quickly by newstands. i can imagine that picture being a catalyst for imprinting negative views about the obamas.
  • medussamedussa Posts: 12,993Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    i wish it wasn't on the cover. there are many people who won't read the article or understand it as satire as they're walking quickly by newstands. i can imagine that picture being a catalyst for imprinting negative views about the obamas.

    ITA.
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    medussa wrote: »
    frau wrote: »
    i wish it wasn't on the cover. there are many people who won't read the article or understand it as satire as they're walking quickly by newstands. i can imagine that picture being a catalyst for imprinting negative views about the obamas.

    ITA.

    This was my thought as well. I think instead of making fun of that kind of scare tactics and misinformation, it may help spread it and reinforce those negative views of the Obamas, because most people will not actually read the article. They will just see it on the newsstand and file that image away in their mind.
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Posts: 4,812Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    i like it very much but i wish it wasn't on the cover. there are many people who won't read the article or understand it as satire as they're walking quickly by newstands. i can imagine that picture being a catalyst for imprinting negative views about the obamas.

    Well put.

    *I* think it's funny, because it's so obviously sarcasm and I'm a big, big fan of sarcasm, but a lot of people won't get it or will interpret it to mean something sinister. Which is a shame, because if you take it for what it's presumably intended, it's farking hilarious.
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.
  • sonnysonny Posts: 467Registered Users
    Great I had just convinced my dad that the email circulating around was false, this will not help my effort!
    We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people. ~.Martin Luther King Jr
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users
    it's been a long time since i've purchased the new yorker. i'll have to pick up that issue. i like that side eye action that barack is giving.
    what's up with michelle's afro? does afro=angry militant. i wear an afro sometimes. :sad10:
  • automaticflowersautomaticflowers Posts: 3,465Registered Users
    Yeah, I don't see anything good coming of that. Stupid New Yorker.
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Posts: 4,812Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    it's been a long time since i've purchased the new yorker. i'll have to pick up that issue. i like that side eye action that barack is giving.
    what's up with michelle's afro? does afro=angry militant. i wear an afro sometimes. :sad10:

    Well, yeah, if you ask the right (or wrong?) people. The same way wearing a turban makes you a terrorist. Don't you watch Faux News?

    /sarcasm

    And yeah, the side eye action from Barack is pretty much what makes it for me. High Larious.
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.
  • MarMar Posts: 3,003Registered Users
    I agree with Frau and Utopiastars.
    "what's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding?"



    "If you judge people,you have no time to love them"
    -Mother Theresa
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users
    The same way wearing a turban makes you a terrorist. Don't you watch Faux News?

    /sarcasm
    very good point!
  • JosephineJosephine Posts: 14,175Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    i like it very much but i wish it wasn't on the cover. there are many people who won't read the article or understand it as satire as they're walking quickly by newstands. i can imagine that picture being a catalyst for imprinting negative views about the obamas.

    Well put.

    *I* think it's funny, because it's so obviously sarcasm and I'm a big, big fan of sarcasm, but a lot of people won't get it or will interpret it to mean something sinister. Which is a shame, because if you take it for what it's presumably intended, it's farking hilarious.

    Same here. Hilarious.
  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    Definitely read the article. Very insightful.


    My initial reaction was "that's wrong and inappropriate" Then I looked at his other work. He just likes to show the absurdities of opinions. I can dig that. GB the (almost) free press.
    hello.world.
  • wild~hairwild~hair Posts: 9,890Registered Users
    I have no problem with it. The New Yorker covers are genius and this is no exception. I can't wait to read the story.

    Also, this is classic Barry Blitt. His work is often hilariously shocking.



    As for the repercussions of people walking by seeing it, The New Yorker has, for many years now, had a 1/2 vertical page with story titles and page numbers on it. It heavily obscures the cover illustration. This is done to boost newsstand sales, since they've never printed words on their cover other than the title of the mag, choosing instead to feature a full page illustration.

    So, in other words, unless someone picks up the mag to look at it, they're not going to see much of the illo, just the upper right corner [assuming the newsstand itself will obscure the bottom portion].
  • journotravelerjournotraveler Posts: 2,816Registered Users
    i have really mixed feelings about this. i'm a big fan of the first ammendment--it keeps me employed!--and i can appreciate good satire.

    but having said that, looking at this, my immediate reaction wasn't, "wow, that's some good satire." i found it inappropriate & offensive.

    also, the new yorker is usually a little more nuanced in its satire.
    3B corkscrews with scatterings of 3A & 3C.
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    wild~hair wrote: »
    I have no problem with it. The New Yorker covers are genius and this is no exception. I can't wait to read the story.

    Also, this is classic Barry Blitt. His work is often hilariously shocking.



    As for the repercussions of people walking by seeing it, The New Yorker has, for many years now, had a 1/2 vertical page with story titles and page numbers on it. It heavily obscures the cover illustration. This is done to boost newsstand sales, since they've never printed words on their cover other than the title of the mag, choosing instead to feature a full page illustration.

    So, in other words, unless someone picks up the mag to look at it, they're not going to see much of the illo, just the upper right corner [assuming the newsstand itself will obscure the bottom portion].

    That's true, I forgot about that.
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    David's interview on huffingtonpost.com.

    My favorite question and answer:

    Q: A number of commenters also wondered if there was a cover in the offing that would depict McCain unflatteringly - do you have any policy or general customs regarding the even treatment of candidates in terms of coverage, and covers?
    A: Oh, we get around to everybody I hope.



    :laughing7:
    hello.world.
  • ursulaursula Posts: 1,461Registered Users
    I have mixed feelings about it. My first reaction was to cringe, but later I thought it was pretty funny. As for whether they should have run it, I am undecided. I agree that it might have been more effective inside the magazine rather than the cover.

    Part of my dissertation actually dealt with a really popular satirical poem that was completely misunderstood by most readers and that misunderstanding had dramatic political consequences. The poet's intention was to satirize racism, but the poem ended up being used straightforwardly, as support for racism. That's what this image reminds me of. It risks supporting the attitudes and opinions it's attempting to satirize. As journotraveler said, the New Yorker is usually more nuanced in its satire, but I think that the problem here is that, as ridiculous and over-the-top as the image seems, it's not at all far off from what a lot of people are thinking. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to those people; it would be a portrait!
    In search of a lost signature...
  • SuburbanbushbabeSuburbanbushbabe Posts: 15,402Registered Users
    It only illustrates what is the prevailing zeitgeist among a s certain population of Americans. I don't think it reinforces it, just brings it out into the open. In my mind that's not a bad thing. If he wins, it's going to be a collector's item.
    My blog - /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fsuburbanbushbabe.wordpress.com%2F" class="Popup
    My FOTKI - /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwhatsnew.fotki.com%2Fsuburbanbushbabe%2F" class="Popup
    comic-p.jpg

    Playing with my hair is a hobby. Fluffy, fine natural 4a. Goal= Healthy, beautiful hair that retains its length.
    Hear that crash? It's me falling off the CG wagon.
  • journotravelerjournotraveler Posts: 2,816Registered Users
    sigh. people are stupid:

    Conservative Web site Worldnetdaily.com conducted an informal poll about the controversial New Yorker cover and found that most of the people taking the poll didn’t so much understand the concept of satire. The majority of the respondents said that the “[t]he image isn’t too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family.”
    While the New Yorker said in a press release that its cover “satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign,” for a majority of respondents to WND’s poll, the cover apparently provided support for their false perceptions of Obama’s religion and patriotism: As of 10:07 a.m. ET on July 14, the most popular option in the poll — selected by 60 percent of WND respondents — was “The image isn’t too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family.” The second-most popular option was “Funny, because there’s some truth in it,” which was selected by 11 percent of respondents.
    3B corkscrews with scatterings of 3A & 3C.
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    sigh. people are stupid:

    Conservative Web site Worldnetdaily.com conducted an informal poll about the controversial New Yorker cover and found that most of the people taking the poll didn’t so much understand the concept of satire. The majority of the respondents said that the “[t]he image isn’t too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family.”
    While the New Yorker said in a press release that its cover “satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign,” for a majority of respondents to WND’s poll, the cover apparently provided support for their false perceptions of Obama’s religion and patriotism: As of 10:07 a.m. ET on July 14, the most popular option in the poll — selected by 60 percent of WND respondents — was “The image isn’t too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family.” The second-most popular option was “Funny, because there’s some truth in it,” which was selected by 11 percent of respondents.

    Why am I not surprised?
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users
    As of 10:07 a.m. ET on July 14, the most popular option in the poll — selected by 60 percent of WND respondents — was “The image isn’t too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family.”
    just what i thought.
  • wild~hairwild~hair Posts: 9,890Registered Users
    One self-described "informal" poll. How many respondents? What demographic?

    It could be just 50 people, all radically to the right. Being informal, it could just be the worldnetdaily.com webmaster's immediate family members. *shrug*
  • journotravelerjournotraveler Posts: 2,816Registered Users
    true. i'm not posting it as an example of a definitive anything. i posted it in exasperation as an example of willful ignorance.
    3B corkscrews with scatterings of 3A & 3C.
  • wild~hairwild~hair Posts: 9,890Registered Users
    true. i'm not posting it as an example of a definitive anything. i posted it in exasperation as an example of willful ignorance.

    Understood.

    I always keep hoping that people will be smarter and savvier. Even though I keep being proved wrong on that count. :angry7:
  • Shooting StarShooting Star Posts: 167Registered Users
    I'm with Frau, I don't like the picture of Michelle with that afro and AK 47. Afros do not equal militant or hatred for America.

    I haven't read the article, so I really can't say too much. I just feel like the New Yorker could have been a little bit smarter about this. A lot prejudice right wingers are going to pass by the stands and think that the New Yorker is agreeing with their beliefs. A lot of Obama supporters, Blacks, and so on are going to pass by the news stand and become offended. The cover should have had "How slandering hurts the Obama Campaign" or something of that nature. Having the cartoon on the cover makes it look like the New Yorker is just trying to get attention.
    I Love Epic Men...
    RacerX.jpg
  • wild~hairwild~hair Posts: 9,890Registered Users
    I'm with Frau, I don't like the picture of Michelle with that afro and AK 47. Afros do not equal militant or hatred for America.

    It's not saying that they do. Just as it's not saying that Obama has a portrait of Bin Laden on his wall or likes to burn US flags in the fireplace.

    Because it's satire, everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt, even the use of symbolism.
  • RheannaRheanna Posts: 2,614Registered Users
    wild~hair wrote: »
    One self-described "informal" poll. How many respondents? What demographic?

    It could be just 50 people, all radically to the right. Being informal, it could just be the worldnetdaily.com webmaster's immediate family members. *shrug*

    I'm not an Obama fan, and I'm right-wing, though not radical by any means. I "got" it. Just being to the right doesn't mean you don't understand satire. Or that you think that picture is anything like Obama really is.

    As someone who occasionally reads foxnews.com (*gasp*) and generally votes conservatively, I still got it 100%. I think if anything, it is good press for Obama. It seems that the "no press is bad press" rule applies to him, just as it does to Hollywood stars and starlets. So I think it will have no ill effects on his campaign.
    DPTFm5.png
  • EilonwyEilonwy Posts: 12,389Registered Users
    Rheanna83 wrote: »
    wild~hair wrote: »
    One self-described "informal" poll. How many respondents? What demographic?

    It could be just 50 people, all radically to the right. Being informal, it could just be the worldnetdaily.com webmaster's immediate family members. *shrug*

    I'm not an Obama fan, and I'm right-wing, though not radical by any means. I "got" it. Just being to the right doesn't mean you don't understand satire..

    I don't think the implication was that conservatives don't understand satire. I think the point is that 1) perhaps most of the people who responded to that poll were particularly stupid, and 2) WorldNetDaily is a conservative site, so those who responded were probably conservative.
«13