The New Yorker has lost its mind

[GiggsOho]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/13/yikes-controversial-emnew_n_112429.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11719.html

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/3897/obamaaz8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)



I'm smart enough to get "the politics of fear" the article is getting at, but I'm also smart enough to know this is 1) irreprehensible journalism, 2) just fucking stupid, 3) going to be talked about for way longer than it should be.

[saysmydoctor]

Amazing, the media community perpetuating nonissue. That never happens.

[x togepi x]

meh. it's ironic. if you're to be held responsible for how other people take your message, then what's the point in speaking at all?

[Broken Parachute]

If someone did this with McCain sitting in a chair in an old age home, with a gun in his hands, wearing his military uniform and a bubble coming out of his mouth with some witty comment about another hundred years in the Middle East or something, nothing would be said. It's Obama though so of course people are going to call it tasteless and racist and all that good stuff.

It's an election year. Tasteless, cartoon journalism is expected. It's been like that for awhile and it's probably not going to change anytime soon, so it is what it is.

[thespearkid]

I don't really see it as tasteless. I interpret it as they're making fun of modern journalist for assuming a fist bump makes someone a terrorist.

[x togepi x]

I don't really see it as tasteless. I interpret it as they're making fun of modern journalist for assuming a fist bump makes someone a terrorist.

This is what they're doing. from the article i read about this, there's an article in the new yorker that talks about that specifically.

[Broken Parachute]

The funny thing is that this article/picture is about things being made into more than they really are and the article/picture itself is going to have more made of it than it really is.

[thespearkid]

The irony is awesome.

[TK]

I don't see the problem, about time Obama is ousted.

[NickLopez]

I don't see the problem, about time Obama is ousted.
AS A TERRORIST.

[TK]

AS A TERRORIST.

And as a Muslim. I'm glad someone else is actually smart enough to understand that he's not only a Muslim, but also a terrorist. Because as we all know, all Muslims are terrorists. But let's not stereotype, not all terrorists are Muslim!

[The_kok]

This is to be expected from a political side which has been intellectually bankrupt for about 2 decades

[ghostyouare]

It just hit me, jesus christ, how did we not see this sooner.

Easter Island... Obamas giant face... its a prophecy...

[tomgreen680]

my friends and I made the cover of the new yorker in '04.

[thespearkid]

my friends and I made the cover of the new yorker in '04.
Siqq brag.

[SauzaGold]

artist Barry Blitt, "satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign.”

[asmolitor]

well, there's satire... and then there's perpetuating negative assumptions that no matter how frequently they are debunked, a fair amount of america still can't be assured of the truth.

[thespearkid]

well, there's satire... and then there's perpetuating negative assumptions that no matter how frequently they are debunked, a fair amount of america still can't be assured of the truth.
What are they perpetuating?

[x togepi x]

i don't think many of the people who actually think obama is a terrorist married to a radical feminist black panther are going to be reading the new yorker.

[thespearkid]

i don't think many of the people who actually think obama is a terrorist married to a radical feminist black panther are going to be reading the new yorker.
Hahaha.

[asmolitor]

well, if the cover was solely contained to subscribers, fair enough. but it's a national news story now. and if they're not reading the new yorker, it's probably fair to assume not everyone will understand the satirical context.

[thespearkid]

Smart people will get it. Dumb people won't. Like someone said above, you can't be held responsible for how people interpret what you say.

[asmolitor]

those first two sentences essentially prove my concerns. i understand how the new yorker is trying to frame the issue by pointing out the ridiculous assumptions people have about obama. but at the same time, to me it seems to serve and perpetuate those same assumptions. at the very least, it keeps the obama/terrorist issue at the forefront of election news, when it clearly shouldn't be an issue at all. i mean, look at the dozens of anecdotes in this forum that involve someone still being unsure if obama's a terrorist or not. in my opinion, in trying to satirize those doubts, they've solidified those doubts in the minds of those who were skeptical to begin with.

[x togepi x]

those first two sentences essentially prove my concerns. i understand how the new yorker is trying to frame the issue by pointing out the ridiculous assumptions people have about obama. but at the same time, to me it seems to serve and perpetuate those same assumptions. at the very least, it keeps the obama/terrorist issue at the forefront of election news, when it clearly shouldn't be an issue at all. i mean, look at the dozens of anecdotes in this forum that involve someone still being unsure if obama's a terrorist or not. in my opinion, in trying to satirize those doubts, they've solidified those doubts in the minds of those who were skeptical to begin with.

the obama is a terrorist issue was going to be on the forefront of the election anyway. it's not as if this cover is going to do that much more to keep people talking about that, especially when its not really the new yorker's fault that people are complaining about it without bringing up that it's obvious satire & has an article criticizing the very ideas that you're accusing them of perpetuating.

i just don't understand why so many obama supporters are all about using the kid gloves on him. i really don't think many people who honestly think all of these things are true are going to pick up the new yorker. are conservatives really going to look to an "elitist liberal rag" for inspiration in their defamation campaign? i don't think those who are skeptical are really going to look this as a source instead of something idiotic like WorldNetDaily or the Drudge Report.

Besides, like i said at the beginning of this thread, complaining about things like this essentially makes the entire concept of irony pointless. what's next, are we going to complain about A Modest Proposal since it talks about eating babies? damn those liberals!

[Machu505]

The percentage of those who think Obama is a Jew has went from 0 to 1 in the past month.

[GiggsOho]

The percentage of those who think Obama is a Jew has went from 0 to 1 in the past month.

Is that Monday night's Colbert Report? One of the funniest episodes I have ever watched. The slump after the writers break that show suffered looks to be over.

[saysmydoctor]

I wish I had my satellite back, I miss my Colbert.

[Machu505]

Is that Monday night's Colbert Report? One of the funniest episodes I have ever watched. The slump after the writers break that show suffered looks to be over.

Yes. And absolutely.

[thespearkid]

Jon Stewart ripped this story apart earlier tonight.

[AnarchyintheUS]

This is to be expected from a political side which has been intellectually bankrupt for about 2 decades

I despise people like you.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/86/228342899_51a47eb847.jpg

[Thug_Nasty]

And as a Muslim. I'm glad someone else is actually smart enough to understand that he's not only a Muslim, but also a terrorist. Because as we all know, all Muslims are terrorists. But let's not stereotype, not all terrorists are Muslim!
he's not a muslim, you fuck.

[shit stroll]

your sarcasm detector is broken.

[TK]

your sarcasm detector is broken.

he's not a muslim, you fuck.

what he said, you fuck.

[timchoke]

Like someone else said, it's amazing what a one way street this issue is. If a magazine puts out a satirical cover of Bush or McCain, no one blinks.
You guys, yes we can...make fun of Obama. He's not a deity.

[MorningWillCome]

i don't think many of the people who actually think obama is a terrorist married to a radical feminist black panther are going to be reading the new yorker.

hahaha, so true.

[Praetor]

I didn't think it was anything to get angry about. It was bad satire and not funny but I didn't find it offensive.

[WakingTheMisery]

Oh that's why we sold out of this the minute it was put out.

[GiggsOho]

Like someone else said, it's amazing what a one way street this issue is. If a magazine puts out a satirical cover of Bush or McCain, no one blinks.
You guys, yes we can...make fun of Obama. He's not a deity.



Being called a terrorist isn't making fun of someone. Having your religious beliefs mocked isn't making fun of someone. Burning the American Flag isn't making fun of someone.

[Love As Arson]

Being called a terrorist isn't making fun of someone. Having your religious beliefs mocked isn't making fun of someone. Burning the American Flag isn't making fun of someone.
It is making fun of the rumors about a political candidate. The actual article is quite decent, if one is able to bypass their faux-outrage and read it objectively.

[TeachBirds2Fly]

It's more 4chan than The NewYorker, and I think a lot of people will find it funny not for the satiric ironic side.

[thespearkid]

Being called a terrorist isn't making fun of someone. Having your religious beliefs mocked isn't making fun of someone. Burning the American Flag isn't making fun of someone.
No one called anyone a terrorist or mocked anyone's beliefs or burned a flag. It's a satirical cartoon. That's just the way satire works. Stephen Colbert calls Barack Obama a secret Muslim almost every night but he doesn't really mean it. Have you even read the article?

[GiggsOho]

No one called anyone a terrorist or mocked anyone's beliefs or burned a flag. It's a satirical cartoon. That's just the way satire works. Stephen Colbert calls Barack Obama a secret Muslim almost every night but he doesn't really mean it. Have you even read the article?


Colbert and the New Yorker are two seperate things.

[thespearkid]

Colbert and the New Yorker are two seperate things.
Not in this case as they're both using satire to get their point across.

[Moritz421]

If someone did this with McCain sitting in a chair in an old age home, with a gun in his hands, wearing his military uniform and a bubble coming out of his mouth with some witty comment about another hundred years in the Middle East or something, nothing would be said. It's Obama though so of course people are going to call it tasteless and racist and all that good stuff.

It's an election year. Tasteless, cartoon journalism is expected. It's been like that for awhile and it's probably not going to change anytime soon, so it is what it is.


Exactly what I was thinking

[theliftedlorax8]

Check out Vanity Fair's (http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/07/new-yorker-cover.html) cover this month.

[TeachBirds2Fly]

Thats quality, is that really the cover or just an article?
Also I dont think it is as bad, having Bush in the background and Osama are pretty big differences for one.